U.S. government shutdown since Oct 1, 2025

The shutdown is about whether Democrats will be an opposing party or will capitulate to fascism.

Read: Trump Digs In On Anti-Trans Provisions In Shutdown Fight Message: The provisions are becoming a key sticking point in the ongoing fight to keep the government open. Erin Reed, Sep 23, 2025

"Nationally, the government is hurtling toward a shutdown, with Republicans demanding dozens of anti-LGBTQ+ riders—from bathroom bans on military bases to a sweeping federal funding ban on transgender care that could gut access nationwide. The fight hit a breaking point two days ago when Trump canceled negotiations with Democrats, citing in part their refusal to enshrine anti-trans discrimination into law. Where that standoff ends is uncertain." as Erin Reed (Sept 26, 2025)

Read: Republicans Start Shutdown Payback As White House Blocks Blue State Funds The Trump administration announced a hold on a New York infrastructure project and threatened more layoffs for federal workers. Arthur Delaney and Igor Bobic, HuffPost, Oct 1, 2025

“.. This is the risk of shutting down the government and handing the keys to Russ Vought,” the Senate majority leader said .. @politico.com www.politico.com/live-updates...

[image or embed]

— Carl Quintanilla (@carlquintanilla.bsky.social) October 2, 2025 at 10:05 AM

MIKE LEE: Russ Vought has been dreaming about this moment since puberty MIKE JOHNSON: Russ Vought does not enjoy this responsibility

[image or embed]

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) October 2, 2025 at 10:07 AM

Bonica used to have to analyze data to show this kind of pattern, but now they just come out and say it

[image or embed]

— Jake Grumbach (@jakemgrumbach.bsky.social) October 2, 2025 at 2:18 PM

Read: Legal Experts Call Trump’s Response To The Shutdown ‘Extremely Alarming’ Federal workers must walk a free speech tightrope while the Trump administration openly flouts the rules. Brandi Buchman, HuffPost, Oct 2, 2025

Will Bunch reminds us in the Philadelphia Inquirer ("Why we can’t allow Trump to ban that other f-word," October 5, 2025):

"Too many lawmakers, and journalists, refuse to understand the fascist moment because their salary depends on not understanding it. But I’ve been struck this weekend by how one prominent political figure is actually getting it — properly framing the current government shutdown as more than a squabble over healthcare but a fight for democracy.

“Listen, I don’t think we’re asking for too much in that we are telling the president that if you want us to sign onto a budget, it can’t be a budget that funds the destruction of our democracy,“ Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy told the New Republic’s essential Greg Sargent last week. ”I would be a sucker to agree to a budget that literally funds an operation to hunt me and my allies down — to imprison us, harass us, intimidate us.""

Image caption: Christians in the Roosevelt Room in the White House, Oct. 29, 2019. Official White House photo by Joyce Boghosian.

Margaret Sullivan, in American Crisis, Oct 5, 2025, says that "the larger story" is that "Democrats are determined to prevent huge increases in Americans’ health care costs by standing firm." And, while "the mainstream press is largely playing its usual “both-sides at fault” game...Americans nevertheless do understand the reality." Unfortunately:

"“Partisan bickering” was a favorite phrase in news alerts. Headlines featured how Democrats and Republicans “trade blame” and we heard a lot about “dueling measures.”

Here’s one from CBS News on Sunday that was typical enough: “Johnson, Schumer accuse each other of not being serious about negotiations as shutdown stretches into another week.”

These words are factual, but they fail to get the bigger picture across. They are accurate but not truthful in a larger sense."

What we're witnessing is U.S. fascism

In a post last week on Democracy Americana, Thomas Zimmer reminds us that, on September 25, Trump

"released a presidential memo – an instrument quite similar to a presidential executive order – on “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence.” It was entirely geared towards laying the groundwork for the type of comprehensive crackdown on the “Left” the Trumpists had been demanding since the murder of Charlie Kirk: The memo instructed the entire machinery of the federal government to employ an incredibly expansive definition of “domestic terrorism” to go after any organization or individual associated with leftist “anti-fascism.”"

This memo

"open[s] the door for virtually anyone in the United States – certainly anyone who is critical of Trump – to be harassed by the state as a domestic terrorist. If you believe that sounds hyperbolic, please read the memo yourself. ...my first reaction is that it is a breathtakingly authoritarian document. The only purpose it serves is to create a flexible instrument that could be used against anyone the regime deems an enemy. It employs a definition of “domestic terrorism” that is entirely directed against the bizarre phantasma of “the Left” as it exists in the feverish mind of someone like Stephen Miller – even going so far as to explicitly declare all “activities under the umbrella of self-described ‘anti-fascism’” as likely to be terroristic. Meanwhile, the memo widens the definition so much – including “organized doxing campaigns, swatting, rioting, looting, trespass, assault, destruction of property, threats of violence, and civil disorder” – that it becomes difficult to identify what act of resistance or disobedience the state couldn’t persecute as “domestic terrorism.”"

Will Bunch reminds us today in the Philadelphia Inquirer ("Why we can’t allow Trump to ban that other f-word," October 5, 2025):

"The president, Vice President JD Vance, and their minions have seized on the actions of a few young, lone-wolf assassins to issue blanket condemnations seeking to vilify and, in essence, ban free speech that accurately describes America’s downward spiral into autocracy."

It matters.

"This isn’t some arcane dispute over language. The Trump regime is desperate to control the words of America’s political conversation because they want to normalize what they are doing right now, which is pursuing a rapid race to demolish democratic norms and institutions. Vance’s goal in his North Carolina speech is really to lump the most outrageous comments online with the bulk of legitimate dissent about the outrages that are happening right now from Chicago to the Caribbean."

They can try.

"It’s horrific that militarized cops are firing projectiles at working journalists, or that a reporter covering ICE raids in Atlanta can be arrested and deported to El Salvador. But they haven’t worked their way down to schlubby white boomer columnists — not yet — so I’m going to use the might of this keyboard until they take it away.

Words still not only matter, but have incredible power. What we are witnessing is American fascism. I am an anti-fascist."

Take the antidote: Psyching yourself up and in

Recent liturgy

"When people are burning books and trying to take away your access to education, what you should be doing now is reading.
When people are amping up the volume so that you don't know which way is up and left from right, go get quiet, right?
When you are feeling so disconnected from yourself, literally tap in.
When you are feeling like everyone around you is out to get you, go be in community, right?
Like, the antidote is in front of us. It is the opposite of what they are presenting. ... what you have to do is force yourself to do the opposite.
When I want to be alone is when I reach out. Right?
When I want to scream is when I get, like, quiet and still." — Danielle Moodie (48:28–49:10, 49:45–49:58)

And

"We don’t need to figure out a perfect world right now. What we need to do is figure out how we can participate in reality. We need to stop seeking escape and seek instead plug in, play a part, take some action out in this world that so desperately needs us. It’s time to accept reality, accept that it’s ugly out there, and accept that we’re the only ones who can change this world. The forces of fascism rely on you tuning out, running from reality, indulging in their fantasies. We have to reject their lies, reject the carrots they dangle, and instead run toward reality and toward active participation in this fucked up world." — J. P. Hill

And

"Rejecting fascism's reality generation – its illusions – is easier when you believe (correctly) that nothing is forever and that the pendulum never stops swinging. Sometimes it swings hard, sometimes it barely swings at all, but it always swings. Today you are told to believe the pendulum has been snapped off and thrown into a landfill. It's a nice story for those who want permanent power. Look closely though and you'll see the pendulum, ticking back and forth like it always has.

* * *

Opposing these people is as easy as not believing their bullshit. Laugh at the shadows cast upon that cave wall you keep in your pocket, the one that tells you what is real and what is not. Reject their messaging. Counter it.

* * *

The regime is commanding you to believe a lie: That is has no underbelly. Stop listening. Stop dooming."

— Denny Carter (Sept 25, 2025)

And

"There are times when I’m in denial about my own fear. ... I feel like I can start using the word evil, now, to describe those in power. They’re heeeeere, and they generate and foment hatred, they...encourage violence, they hoard wealth and resources, and don’t think twice about the harm they’re causing. They revel in it.

It walks, it lives, it breathes among us. It doesn’t require a soundtrack or admission fee. We may disagree on what to call them—authoritarians, fascists, whatever—but they, those in power, are the true evil, the real specters. They’re directing the waking nightmare we’re in.

Assemble your magic kits, your spells, your righteous poems, gather your wits, your allies, and your accomplices. See a showing of One Battle After Another. Take good care. I’m with you in spirit and in solidarity."

— Wendy C. Ortiz, "evil," Mommy's El Camino, October 5, 2025

Maybe this too, I guess

Both-sidesing: Democrats trying to impress Republicans on how harsh they can be on immigrants?

This person who identifies as an "abundance liberal" suggests that Democrats should propose taxing immigrants more for the purpose of (somehow?) impressing Republicans (who care about real numbers? who argue in good faith?).

I'm kind of shocked that anyone is still proposing technocratic solutions to the "debate" over immigration. Even if this were a good idea (and it is not), Republican elites and media will never tell their base about it. You can't policy your way out of a propaganda problem!

[image or embed]

— Michael Hobbes (@michaelhobbes.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 1:47 PM

There is no indication that republican leaders or voters even know what current immigration policy looks like. Their views are driven by Breitbart blowups about caravans, Haitians eating cats and MS-13. Change the policy all you want, they'll never give you an ounce of credit for it.

— Michael Hobbes (@michaelhobbes.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 1:53 PM

There is no compromise policy Democrats can offer Republicans to make them act normal on this issue. We simply have to state the basic reality — immigrants contribute to our country in myriad ways — and fight for it. I don't know how so many journalists convinced themselves this isn't an option.

— Michael Hobbes (@michaelhobbes.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 1:59 PM

Exactly. Exactly. We know there is no compromise to be had on immigration *BECAUSE DEMOCRATS HAVE TRIED TO BROKER ONE FOR 30 YEARS*. Three f’ing decades! As long as Jerusalem Demsas, who offered another “let’s hear the right out” proposal this week, has been alive!

[image or embed]

— Greg Greene (he/him/his) (@greene.haus) September 6, 2025 at 6:56 PM

If the punishment is going to happen, if you cannot stop it (And Democrats have never been able to stop it), then you need to extract cost for it; or else you're just allowing your enemies to shift costs onto you for nothing. You are building political externalities that make it more difficult for u

— jessdee.bsky.social (@jessdee.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 7:04 PM

No democracy, but hope

Chris Kluwe tells Marisa Kabas (interview published today) that the US is currently under "weak authoritarian rule," which means "we still have the potential to get back our democracy. We just have to show up and fight for it," and that's why he's running for office even though currently there is no democracy.

KABAS: Do you think we still have a democracy?

KLUWE: Currently? No. I believe we are currently in authoritarianism, and I think that's been made very clear, both due to the fact that the Republicans, as well as the Supreme Court, refuse to reign Trump in. He's deploying the National Guard to multiple states. He's deploying the military into US cities. And he has publicly proclaimed that he wants to be a dictator. And call me silly, but when Donald Trump says he wants to do something, I listen, because whenever he says he wants to do something, he always tries to do that thing.

KABAS: I think running for office, though, shows some faith that a system still exists, right? That you can affect change from the inside in some way. So if we aren't living in a democracy, what do you hope to achieve by running and working within the system as it currently is?

KLUWE: So right now, we're currently under authoritarian rule, but it's still weak authoritarian rule. The courts are still pushing back on the lower levels, both federally and state, and there are a lot of states that are pushing back. Obviously, Newsom has been doing the redistricting stuff. Governor Pritzker has been talking about ‘you can't come into Chicago.’ I think I saw something in Philadelphia where if ICE or DHS breaks the law, they're going to prosecute and charge them. And so we still have the potential to get back our democracy. We just have to show up and fight for it.

I find this passage helpful because sometimes people do ask about the point of trying to leverage the old system at all if it's already broken and overtaken. The hope is that the old system may have some useful tools to take power from the authoritarians and build a better future.

In a post on Democracy Americana (September 28, 2025), Thomas Zimmer reflects on the sense of whiplash:

"Is Trump winning? Is he losing?

The only productive way forward is to reject the question. Binary categories of “Winning/losing” – or “weak/strong” – are just not very helpful right now. They tend to reproduce mood swings more than they help generate plausible analysis."

Real easy: Don't deliberately misgender people

In May, the Quakers in Britain published a Statement of policy on provision of transinclusive facilities on BYM’s estate.

They also wrote up a toilet presentation (PDF) in June.

On 26 June, an organization wrote to the Quakers. They identified themselves as Sex Matters to Quakers, apparently deriving their name from Helen Joyce's organization, Sex Matters. They also have an X account that says "Joined September 2023." The day after writing to the Quakers, they posted their complaint to Facebook. Their complaint is simply an elaboration of the idea that the category of women belongs to cis women, that trans women mustn't exist within it, and that trans/cis coexistence is a philosophical question that must be subjected to ongoing debate where the terms of the debate involve ongoing consultation with anti-trans people.

On 16 July, the Britain Yearly Meeting Trustees responded publicly (PDF), restating their policy. They said they don't answer to Helen Joyceists — not in the ethical sense of "answer," anyway. ("...as you highlighted, Sex Matters to Quakers is not a Quaker Recognised Body, and therefore there is no relationship of accountability between BYMT and it – we are accountable solely to Yearly Meeting.") They may, however, answer a letter in the mere sense of writing a letter: "We respond to you as a matter of courtesy."

At the end of the Quakers' five-page reply, they gave this list of pointers I rather like (I'm quoting it):

• Deliberate misgendering of a person is transphobia.
• Referring to trans women as men is transphobia.
• Assuming a trans person poses a risk simply for being trans is transphobic.
• Stating that trans men are vulnerable and “groomed” into transition is a transphobic trope.
• References to “trans activism” as anything other than the legitimate effort to protect and advocate for the rights of people who are trans or non-binary is transphobic.
• Alleging that Quakers have been “infiltrated” by trans activists is a transphobic conspiracy theory and we are particularly offended by it.
• The notion that supporting and advocating for the safety, wellbeing, and inclusion of trans people could be damaging to the Religious Society’s reputation, or even “might be the thing that finally destroys them” is shocking and dangerous. It is fearmongering, threatening, and extreme.

A reframe of these tips I might use and offer to others:

People belong to a gender on their own say-so. Don't deliberately call someone by a gender other than what they say they are. Don't assume that trans women are predators, that trans men are helpless victims of someone who convinced them that they're trans, that trans people in general are delusional, or that transness itself puts others at risk. Apart from activism for trans rights, there's no such thing as "trans activism" — so don't use that phrase as a bogeyman, and don't imply that cis people who are trans-inclusive have been somehow infiltrated, captured, brainwashed etc. by trans people or by some trans-inclusive agenda that has forced them to speak in a trans-inclusive way. Trans and cis people alike can mutually support each other's safety, wellbeing, and inclusion. Trans inclusion will not undermine our shared civilization (in which trans people already live and have always lived) and there is probably no reason to expect it will sink any particular organization.

DC takeover is a 'red trial balloon'

Brad Reed:

"In a post on his Truth Social page on Monday morning, Trump framed the decision to deploy the National Guard as necessary to combat crime in the nation's capital.

"Washington, D.C. will be LIBERATED today!" Trump claimed. "Crime, Savagery, Filth, and Scum will DISAPPEAR. I will, MAKE OUR CAPITAL GREAT AGAIN! The days of ruthlessly killing, or hurting, innocent people, are OVER!"

However, the president's claim that the National Guard is needed to protect Washington, D.C. residents from purportedly unprecedented criminal violence does not hold water given that the city has seen a dramatic fall in crime recently.

* * *

Karen Attiah, a columnist for The Washington Post, warned her Bluesky followers against writing off the deployment as an effort by the president to distract from his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

"Threats of the militarization of cities—including D.C., which has been fighting for self determination for generations—isn't a 'distraction,'" she said. "It's a massive, giant, red trial balloon for what an American president can do [in] YOUR city... I need people to wake up.""

— Trump Plan to Deploy National Guard in DC Called 'Giant, Red Trial Balloon': "Trump's move to mobilize the National Guard against Americans in D.C. is another telltale sign of his authoritarian ambitions," said Democratic Illinois congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh. Common Dreams, August 11, 2025

Brad Reed again:

"Shortly after Trump made his announcement, Washington, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb indicated that he was not taking the president's attempt to take over his city's police force lying down.

"The administration's actions are unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful," he declared in a post on X. "There is no crime emergency in the District of Columbia. Violent crime in D.C. reached historic 30-year lows last year, and is down another 26% so far this year. We are considering all of our options and will do what is necessary to protect the rights and safety of District residents."

— Trump Says 'Other Cities Are Hopefully Watching' as He Deploys National Guard, Takes Over DC Police: "The administration's actions are unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful," declared Washington, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb. Common Dreams, August 11, 2025

Hapless humanoid holding balloon by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

Balloon envelope by Hans from Pixabay

Arthur Delaney: "It’s the first time a president has invoked the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 to take over the city’s police, but it’s become routine for Trump to declare dubious emergencies expanding his power." (Trump’s D.C. Police Takeover Is His Latest Made-Up ‘Emergency’ Power Grab: The president offered misleading statements about crime trends in the nation’s capital. HuffPost, Aug 11, 2025)

A year ago, Judd Legum wrote:

"Violent crime, however, is not "skyrocketing" in D.C. in 2024. According to data maintained by the D.C. Metropolitan Police, after a significant increase last year, violent crime is down 27% through May 17 compared to 2023. This includes a 24% reduction in homicide, a 29% drop in assault with a dangerous weapon, and a 27% decline in robbery."

— "The truth about crime in DC", Popular Information, May 20, 2024

Speaking as a DC resident: statehood now. It is absurd that Trump can do this in our city.

[image or embed]

— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) August 10, 2025 at 9:05 PM