[tweezy]

I wish I could find a link, but I remember a study that argued that large bureaucracies can actually impede authoritarian governments concentrating power.

The idea being that when there are so many levers to pull and a disjointed system managing them, it makes it effectively impossible for a small group to effectively wield power. It’s like a buffer against concentrating power into a single individual.

Not that I’m arguing for endless bloat to the US government, that comes with its own problems. I agree we need to rein it in.

But I think there is a freedom-centric argument for a slightly larger government bureaucracy than is strictly necessary.

Or thinking about it in reverse, the bureaucracy is currently preventing the executive branch from just doing whatever it wants. I know Congress and the Supreme Court should act as blocks, but to paraphrase Stalin how much infantry do they have?

A slow moving bureaucratic executive can act as a buffer against ineffective other branches.

Or for those that may support the current administration consolidating power, what if the tides turn? What if in 4 years whoever the liberal villain du jour is takes power? Are we making it so that AOC is the most powerful president in history?

[BlueTemplar]

You seem to assume that Trump will willingly give away his power in 4 years.

He most certainly remembers the January 6th failed coup and will likely spend the next 4 years making sure that he comes on top this time.

And yeah, if he fails, you better hope that the person which did succeed was liberal (and from I heard, AOC is not), because otherwise instead of putting back a system of checks and balances, they will just use the power that Trump concentrated to their own ends.