9 Comments

I've been thinking a bit lately about the global rise of what I think of as warlordism--essentially the capture of some functions of the state by local and regional actors who may simulate or perform the identity of being insurgents, revolutionaries, etc. but where it's really just about having control of military, juridical and carceral power in a locality to the extent that the ostensible national authority is substantively absent from some portion of its territory. For at least some nation-states this condition has been part of their entire postcolonial history since the second half of the 20th Century. In others, it's a relatively new thing, and in others still it's just a threat on the horizon.

Basically the way I read this initiative, these guys are thinking about a warlordist program, not so much a fascist seizure of the entire territory of the nation-state. What I think they're looking ahead to is a situation where the next generation of Joe Arpaio-types are being hooked up with the administrative structures of counties and states that are 'deep red' with the plan to simply reject any meaningful attempt to assert federal authority over the territory and to make it physically dangerous for any federal official or representative to tread into the warlord's jurisdiction. Abbott and DeSantis are halfway there already to this strategy--Texas is off the power grid, Abbott is sending his own forces to the border, he's shipping migrants to New York City on his own authority, he's thinking about strategies that allow Texas to control its residents even if they travel to other states, and his administration openly scoffs at federal initiatives and commands regardless of their content. It is creepy as hell to see Claremont's people be as instrumentally conscious that the missing piece in this project is an organized ability to mobilize law enforcement on behalf of warlordism, e.g., that you can't just wait for a Joe Arpaio to appear but you need to recruit and organize the spread of Arpaioism.

Expand full comment

I'm a political theorist, so naturally I am wondering who is teaching this "Sheriff's Fellowship" course. Also, more pessimistically: it's really disheartening to witness the amount of money flowing into programs like this (from Thiel maybe?), while it's just so damn difficult to get anything funded on the Left.

Expand full comment

I grew up with an uncomfortable amount of exposure to 80s/90s militia / Sovereign Citizen movement crap. People who had strong opinions about Lon Horiuchi. And I can't overemphasize how central to that ideology is the idea that the highest law enforcement authority anyone is obligated to respect is the county sheriff. You're absolutely right that Claremont stuff is just the well-dressed version of that worldview.

Expand full comment

Sheriff Villanueva's campaign to recall George Gascon, and his current targeting of local officials with criminal investigations should be used to prominently highlight just how quickly this can spin out of control with people who would otherwise assume this is an issue that will primarily affect rural and exurban counties. People in cities like, Los Angeles, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and Atlanta should attest to the danger of openly hostile county law enforcement affecting their cities with the general public, and emphasize how a plan to organize Sheriff's along this ideology can very easily lead to disruptions to election administration in their cities.

Expand full comment