Editor's note: Joel Wendland-Liu, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is an associate professor of the Integrative, Religious and Intercultural Studies Department of Grand Valley State University in the U.S. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

The U.S. government has been "shut down" only 14 times since 1980. A "shutdown" refers to the point when a "gap" in funding denies some U.S. government agencies the ability to operate while Congress and the President negotiate how to proceed with the next funding bill. Normally, when such a political conflict emerges, it is temporary and doesn't lead to a general systemic crisis. Congress passes a short-term "continuing resolution" to cover the gap until a longer-term resolution can be formed.

October 1, 2023, marks the beginning of the next "fiscal year" for U.S. government spending. Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, divided by stark ideological differences between hard-right supporters of Donald Trump and more pragmatic politicians loyal to special interests in their congressional districts, failed to pass a spending bill that could bridge this with the next fiscal year without a "shutdown" until the last moment of September 30. The Senate finally approved a bill that keeps the government funded until November 17. 

This year's political crisis appears to be an extension and deepening of the brief 2018 shutdown. During that conflict, then-President Trump and congressional Democrats failed to agree on spending for Trump's immigration policy. Essentially, he sought to target Latin American immigrants for special racially-based government harassment, surveillance, and mass deportations. At the center of that immigration policy was his demand to "build a wall" on the border with Mexico.

Similar demands, as well as other attempts to launch impeachment actions against President Biden, lie at the heart of the "shutdown" that almost happened in October.

The Ronald Reagan administration invented the "shutdown" as a political tactic in 1981 to promote his anti-social welfare policies. He clashed with congressional Democrats who controlled Congress during much of his presidency. His administration escalated those conflicts by denying funding to federal agencies during a "shutdown" and especially targeted agencies that ordinary Americans rely on for social services.

Reagan succeeded in pinning the blame for each of the eight shutdowns he orchestrated on the Democratic Congress. More importantly, however, he won policy victories – tax cuts for wealthy capitalists, erosions in public spending on social programs, and dramatic cuts to retirement health and social security programs. With these tactics, he created a set of policies, which many derisively call "Reaganomics," that endures today as the benchmark of far-right U.S. politics.

Since the 1980s, there have been only three major incidents of "shutdowns," the most famous and enduring saw President Bill Clinton clash with House Republicans over social spending. Each time, Clinton emerged nearly unscathed while congressional Republicans ultimately gave in.

As public, media, and political pressure was on the House Republicans to find a solution, this crisis has proved to be short-lived. But far-right Republican obstructionism to normal government functioning rests today primarily on invented conspiracies about Biden's violations of law, the desire to wrest control of their party on behalf of Trump's allies, and paranoia about diversity and inclusion in government agencies and public education. It isn't related to "normal" political motives or goals.

The 21 Republicans who voted to force a shutdown before are on that party's extreme right wing. Many openly express xenophobia, especially against non-white immigrants. They demand rigid controls over the voting rights of racial minorities, especially when those voting blocs do not support their party. They want to inject their religious doctrines into the state apparatus. They openly demand punishments for the people, politicians, media organizations, and even businesses that they deem to be their "enemies."

This bloc has little hope of securing major policy victories and will surely hand the Republican Party an embarrassing political loss. In the meantime, however, they relish the fact that they will direct harm to the most vulnerable Americans. Social programs that aid poor people will be the first to see funding halts. A shutdown could stop payments for food assistance to poor families. Food programs that fund free lunches at public schools could also be suspended. Many government agencies will place thousands of employees on furlough, suspending their pay.

Trump-supporting members of Congress have openly expressed contempt for the communities and individuals who will be harmed, referring to them as lazy. Simply put, like the Reagan-era "shutdowns," today's far-right members of Congress are playing with the fears and realities of the most vulnerable people in this country to try to win political advantage.

Normally, political commentators refer to the drama around the threats of "shutdowns" and the political compromises that stem from them as political "theater" designed to give an appearance that they are fighting for larger public interests.

This time, however, the ideological differences between the extreme right-wing Trump supporters in Congress and the mainline of political thought and action of the two-party system seem to have produced a new stage of crisis. The actions of the 21 House members appeared to be linked to what journalist Peter Sagal described as a cult-like loyalty to Trump.

Despite Trump's myriad legal troubles, which involve charges of fraud, perjured statements, attempts to overthrow the U.S. government, and illegally hoarding government documents, that threaten his personal empire, his political future, and perhaps even his freedom, Trump loyalists seem to be acting as though he may recover and regain the presidency in 2024. Such an outcome would prompt a deepened political crisis in the U.S. state.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)