"All men are created equal" was declared by slave-holding Founders, embedding hypocrisy as a founding value.

The original 'no kings' goal was intended -- like voting -- for select white men only, as they themselves collectively assumed the deposed King's reign over the country.

Ersatz democracy

We're more a nation w/ outrageously rich (& wildly overprivileged) white men. The original (non-aspirational) Constitution intended exactly that: the Revolution delivered self-rule to them only. The majority remained their property. That is our actual history; the basic configuration never changed.

The government installed after the Revolution -- making it the first of the U.S.A. -- was a PRIVATE republic for privileged white men. The rest (majority) of the population was owned by them as property: to this day only those men ever achieved "self-rule"➡️now the "billionaires who fund ..."

So much for the 'world's oldest democracy', now being put to democratic shame by a third world upstart.
It shouldn't be considered 'picking nits' to point out that our country's oldest government was a PRIVATE "democracy" ONLY for landed white men -- i.e., never more than a PRETEND democracy.

Let's face it -- the servility of the white male political establishment to a malignant narcissist/dementia-addled/shlockmeister is the real poison which put us where we are. Desperate to avoid real competition & maintain their self-decreed political dominance, they sold the people out.
Toadies all.

The white male political establishment needs some time in the wilderness, to figure out how to atone for inflicting such perfidy on their fellow citizens, and why tf they let it happen in the first place.

The first U.S. gov't was a PRIVATE republic for privileged white men only. They literally ruled over everyone else. It's because of this history, that to this very day, they determine everyone's rights -- including their own: the only cohort to ever achieve actual self-rule. And it shows.

"Keep going like it will" is wishful thinking -- for me, insufficiently responsive to the moment.
And I say again, we can no longer count on what we think we know about how things turnout. That is the reality of what it means to be in "uncharted territory" or "unprecedented circumstances".

1. Yes, why I included SCOTUS in my comment.
2. I agree it's 100% on magagop. I disagree that this is the best way to ensure that outcome.
3. I only care about Schumer because it was his job to keep the caucus together, and he didn't. If Pelose had failed this way, there wouldn't be any ACA.

I agree with everything you wrote. But I no longer have confidence that any of it will hold sway.

You're assuming that ending the shutdown will resolve the cause(s) of those worries. The way things used to be that's probably true. I'm saying is in our world, after all we've seen, it's a bit naive to believe that.

A "how it's happened before" analysis is inapt.
The context of all prior instances was government in full post-WWII configuration, Republicans/SCOTUS followed the Constitution, the President wasn't a newly-minted Bitcoin billionaire, the W.H. had an East Wing.
That's not our world anymore.

Oh please, there's nothing more quintessentially American than blinders.
Our Founders declared the equality of men while owning slaves.
They made hypocrisy a founding value, yet are revered to this day.
That didn't happen without big, opaque, wraparound blinders.