Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

To Serve Man—2025 Edition

A classic Twilight Zone episode predicted how democracy dies—not through hidden conspiracies but through willing participation.

Opinion

an illustration of pople walking with brief cases from a UFO.

Echoing Serling’s To Serve Man, Edward Saltzberg reveals how modern authoritarianism uses language, fear, and media control to erode democracy from within.

In March 1962, Rod Serling introduced a Twilight Zone episode that feels prophetic today. "To Serve Man" begins with nine-foot aliens landing at the United Nations, promising to end war and famine. They offer boundless energy and peace. Unlike the menacing invaders of 1950s sci-fi, these Kanamits present themselves as benefactors with serene expressions and soothing words.

The promises appear real. Wars cease. Deserts bloom into gardens. Crop yields soar. People line up eagerly at the Kanamits' embassy to volunteer for trips to the aliens' paradise planet—a world without hunger, conflict, or want.


But back at the UN, translators keep working on the aliens' mysterious book. The meaning comes only in fragments. Meanwhile, protagonist Michael Chambers grows comfortable with the idea of boarding one of the ships. If hunger is solved and peace secured, why not see what else the Kanamits have to offer?

The suspense builds as he walks up the ramp. Just then, his colleague runs forward in panic. She has cracked more of the book's text. Her voice is urgent as guards push Chambers aboard: "Don't go! The book—To Serve Man—it's a cookbook!"

The final image shows Chambers trapped in a cell, speaking directly to the audience from aboard the alien vessel. He tells us that sooner or later, we'll all be on the menu.

The Hidden vs. The Visible

Serling, a World War II paratrooper, used science fiction because network censors blocked his scripts about lynching and war. As he said, "I found that it was all right to have Martians say things Democrats and Republicans could never say." The Kanamits needed everyone to believe their lie about benevolent service.

Today's authoritarianism works differently. It operates multiple cookbooks simultaneously: sanitized bureaucratic language for institutions, protective messaging for supporters, and open intimidation for opponents. The Kanamits needed universal deception. This administration has discovered something more efficient—and more chilling: you don't need to fool everyone when you can convince enough people they're the chefs, not the meal.

When Government Pressure Works

Consider what happened to Jimmy Kimmel. After he mocked the political response to Charlie Kirk's assassination, FCC Chair Brendan Carr didn't work behind closed doors. He went on podcasts and threatened Disney's broadcast licenses publicly. "We can do this the easy way or the hard way," Carr declared. "These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead."

Within hours, major station owners Nexstar and Sinclair announced they would no longer air Kimmel's show. Disney, facing the loss of crucial broadcast licenses worth billions, caved immediately. The show went dark that same night. PEN America called it "government-instigated censorship." Even Republican senators like Rand Paul condemned it as "absolutely inappropriate." But it worked—the threat was public, immediate, and devastatingly effective.

Troops in the Streets

The administration declared a "crime emergency" in Washington, D.C., deploying 800 National Guard troops to patrol the capital's streets like an occupying force. The move came after a single incident involving a government worker, but the response was overwhelming: armed soldiers in fatigues manning checkpoints, conducting searches, and establishing what the administration called "protective perimeters."

In Los Angeles, the deployment was even more dramatic: 4,000 Guard members and 700 Marines swept into neighborhoods during immigration raids. Residents watched through windows as military vehicles rolled down residential streets and troops in body armor set up operations. The administration framed it as protecting federal agents, but a federal judge saw through the euphemisms.

The judge's ruling was scathing: the administration had "systematically used armed soldiers" whose "identity was often obscured by protective armor" to "demonstrate a military presence" and conduct law enforcement activities. This violated the 19th-century Posse Comitatus Act, which explicitly bars the military from policing American citizens. The judge wrote that such conduct amounted to "creating a national police force with the President as its chief."

Just this week, a new executive order took the normalization further. Federal agencies must now "question and interrogate" individuals engaged in political violence regarding the entity or individual organizing such actions before any plea agreements. The order describes this as part of a "comprehensive strategy to investigate, disrupt, and dismantle" domestic terrorism networks.

But strip away the sanitized language, and this is expanded interrogation authority—the power to extract information about political associations before defendants can even consider plea deals. It's presented as "Countering Domestic Terrorism," another cookbook that frames broad investigative powers as protective service for the American people.

The Democratic Test

In Serling's episode, the turning point comes when the translator finally reads beyond the title. Until then, "To Serve Man" was enough to calm suspicion. Only a full translation revealed the cookbook's true purpose.

Democracy depends on such translators—journalists who track how laws work in practice, watchdog groups that expose how "reforms" harm people, and courts that check whether emergency powers match legal boundaries. Without them, promises of service go untested.

The Kanamits needed to hide their cookbook because they required universal compliance. Modern authoritarianism operates in plain sight because it needs only selective permission. Some resist, some look away, and some board willingly, convinced they'll be dining, not being served.

Leaders will always promise they've come to serve. Our job is to translate what that really means—before we board the ship.

Edward Saltzberg is the Executive Director of the Security and Sustainability Forum and the author of The Stability Brief, with over 40 years of experience in civic leadership.

Read More

It’s The Democracy, Stupid!

Why democracy reform keeps failing—and why the economy suffers as a result. A rethink of representation and political power.

Getty Images, Orbon Alija

It’s The Democracy, Stupid!

The economic pain that now defines everyday life for so many people is often treated as a separate problem, something to be solved with better policy, smarter technocrats, or a new round of targeted fixes. Wages stagnate, housing becomes unreachable, healthcare bankrupts families, monopolies tighten their grip, and public services decay. But these outcomes are not accidents, nor are they the result of abstract market forces acting in isolation. They are the predictable consequence of a democratic order that has come apart at the seams. Our deepest crisis is not economic. It is democratic. The economy is merely where that crisis becomes visible and painful.

When democracy weakens, power concentrates. When power concentrates, it seeks insulation from accountability. Over time, wealth and political authority fuse into a self-reinforcing system that governs in the name of the people while quietly serving private interests. This is how regulatory agencies become captured, how tax codes grow incomprehensible except to those who pay to shape them, how antitrust laws exist on paper but rarely in practice, and how labor protections erode while corporate protections harden. None of this requires overt corruption. It operates legally, procedurally, and efficiently. Influence is purchased not through bribes but through campaign donations, access, revolving doors, and the sheer asymmetry of time, expertise, and money.

Keep ReadingShow less
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani speaks at Grand Army Plaza in Brooklyn on January 02, 2026 in New York City.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

The Antisemitic Campaign Against Mamdani

The campaign against Mamdani by some conservative Jewish leaders and others, calling him antisemitic, has just reached a new level with accusations of antisemitism from Israel.

From almost the beginning of his campaign, Mamdani has faced charges of antisemitism because he was critical of Israel's conduct of the war in Gaza and because he has spoken against the proclamation that Israel is a "Jewish state." The fact that his faith is Islam made him an easy target for many.

Keep ReadingShow less
Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs: A Defining Force in Milwaukee

Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs

Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs: A Defining Force in Milwaukee

Alderwoman Milele A. Coggs has been a defining force in Milwaukee civic life for nearly two decades, combining deep community roots with a record of public service grounded in equity, cultural investment, and neighborhood empowerment. Born and raised in Milwaukee, she graduated from Riverside University High School before earning her bachelor’s degree, cum laude, from Fisk University, where she studied Business Administration and English.

The Fulcrum spoke with Coggs about the work she leads, including eliminating food deserts in her district on an episode of The Fulcrum Democracy Forum.

Keep ReadingShow less
I Voted stickers
Millions of Independents will be shut out of the 2026 midterms—here’s what that means for democracy.
BackyardProduction/Getty Images

How Gerrymandering and Authoritarian Trends Threaten 2026 Elections

Ongoing redistricting battles in the United States are occurring amid warnings from analysts, legal scholars, and democracy reform organizations about a broader trend toward weakened institutional protections for fair elections.

In the struggle for partisan advantage, the risk extends beyond unfair maps to the narrowing of competition to make the 2026 election dependent on just a handful of districts and counties.

Keep ReadingShow less