This book is speculative fiction at the intersection of climate fiction and political fiction.
In a future where the U.S. has splintered into new nations, the Atlantic Coalition and Pacific Federation strive for equity and sustainability, while the original U.S. grapples with the consequences of traditionalism and deregulation. From the ashes of environmental and economic collapse, can a new form of democracy rise? Follow the intertwined destinies of Gov. Robert Callahan, Justice Marisol Reyes and Sen. Charlie McBride as they navigate this splintering and what follows. As these three leaders grapple with unprecedented challenges — climate disasters that threaten to wipe out entire regions, economic collapse that leaves millions impoverished and social upheaval that fractures communities — they must confront difficult questions. Can they forge a new path for democracy that can withstand the threats of the modern world? Can justice, compassion and sustainability take root in a world struggling to reconcile its past with its uncertain future?
From one of my friends: "I finished your book. bravo! It's both a strong warning about how quickly a society could derail (gut wrenching) but also an expression of hope for what humans are capable of! I loved Marisol's character."
This book is speculative fiction at the intersection of climate fiction and political fiction.
In a future where the U.S. has splintered into new nations, the Atlantic Coalition and Pacific Federation strive for equity and sustainability, while the original U.S. grapples with the consequences of traditionalism and deregulation. From the ashes of environmental and economic collapse, can a new form of democracy rise? Follow the intertwined destinies of Gov. Robert Callahan, Justice Marisol Reyes and Sen. Charlie McBride as they navigate this splintering and what follows. As these three leaders grapple with unprecedented challenges — climate disasters that threaten to wipe out entire regions, economic collapse that leaves millions impoverished and social upheaval that fractures communities — they must confront difficult questions. Can they forge a new path for democracy that can withstand the threats of the modern world? Can justice, compassion and sustainability take root in a world struggling to reconcile its past with its uncertain future?
From one of my friends: "I finished your book. bravo! It's both a strong warning about how quickly a society could derail (gut wrenching) but also an expression of hope for what humans are capable of! I loved Marisol's character."
Governor Robert Callahan paced the length of the room, his frustration evident in every step. Across from him, Elizabeth Harper sat at the long table, her hands folded in front of her. As always, his energy, emotions and feelings exuded and engulfed the room. Gov. Robert Callahan cut an imposing figure — tall and athletic, with a build that spoke of years spent outdoors rather than behind a desk, he had the physical presence of a man accustomed to command. His dark hair, streaked with the first signs of silver, was neatly trimmed, framing a face that was both rugged and refined. Deep-set blue eyes, sharp with intelligence, scanned the room, taking in every detail with a keen, almost predatory awareness. His square jaw, clean-shaven but marked with the faintest shadow by late afternoon, hinted at a stubborn determination, a man who rarely backed down from a challenge. Callahan's presence was magnetic, drawing the attention of everyone in the room without the need for words — rivaling easily President Landon’s aura from holding the office of the presidency. A subtle intensity lingered in his gaze, tempered by a hint of warmth that put those around him at ease. When he spoke, his voice was deep and resonant, each word measured and deliberate, carrying the weight of conviction behind it.
Elizabeth Harper, at 52 years old, was a political force to be reckoned with. Standing at slightly below six feet, with a lean build, she carried herself with the poised confidence of someone who had spent decades in the trenches of Washington politics. Her sharp, analytical mind was her most formidable weapon — she possessed a near-encyclopedic knowledge of political strategy. Harper's graying hair was cut short in a practical style that framed her angular face, emphasizing the piercing intelligence in her hazel eyes. She had a demeanor that blended cool calculation with an unflinching readiness for the dirty fist fights that politics often required. Her wardrobe was as no-nonsense as her approach — tailored suits in neutral tones, always immaculate, but with an edge that suggested she was prepared for battle at any moment. Today, she wore a tailored charcoal gray suit, the sharp lines of her jacket softened by a cream blouse, a look that was as no-nonsense as her approach. Beneath her composed exterior was a steely resolve. Harper had the instincts of a seasoned fighter, and she was not afraid to get her hands dirty when the situation demanded it. In the corridors of power, Elizabeth Harper was known as someone who could both outthink and outmaneuver her opponents, making her an indispensable asset in President Landon’s administration. Regarding politics and presidential elections, her maxim was that a presidential election is an MRI of the soul, leading to her conviction that the right outcome would happen.
They were in the West Wing of the White House in the Roosevelt Room, named after the two presidents whose portraits graced its walls, and was a space steeped in history and significance. Located just steps from the Oval Office, this room was where high-stakes decisions were made, often determining the course of the nation. At the center of the room stood a large conference table, capable of seating up to 16 people. Its dark mahogany surface reflecting the soft, artificial light from the false skylight above. This skylight, cleverly designed to mimic natural daylight, bathed the room in a warm glow, creating an atmosphere that was both imposing and intimate.
The walls were adorned with portraits of Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt, their eyes seemingly fixed on the proceedings below, as if silently weighing the gravity of each word spoken. On a nearby shelf, Theodore Roosevelt's Nobel Peace Prize was displayed — a reminder of the room’s connection to both past achievements and the immense responsibilities that rested on those who gathered here. This was an election year and talk of a crisis was everywhere — claims of a stolen and unfair election dominated the media, fueled by Steele's relentless campaign.
Chief of Staff Elizabeth Harper was President Landon’s right hand. She was the backbone of the administration, managing crises with a cool head and firm resolve. President Samuel Landon was empathetic, seasoned and often portrayed as a unifier. He had been a lifelong Democrat serving five Senate terms before becoming the president. He had held nearly every position in the Democratic party, including being DNC Chairperson in the early 90s. In the Senate, he chaired influential committees including the Senate Judiciary Committee and Armed Services Committee. He was one of the few Democrats who had an inside look in the first Gulf War in 1992. He now relied heavily on his experienced team to guide his decisions and navigate the complexities of governance. Both Landon and Harper hated Steele’s brash style and his ultra right-wing policies and neither could stand his combative nature. Steele thrived on chaos and confrontation, often making decisions based on gut instinct rather than careful deliberation, the complete opposite of Landon. Until this election, neither had encountered such a polarizing figure like Steele who was tailormade to exploit hyper-partisan politics that had now taken root. The retail politics and appeal to the center that had been Harper and Landon’s magic touch seemed alien to the current times.
“We need to talk, Elizabeth,” Callahan began, his voice tight with urgency. “The campaign isn’t seeing the electoral college crisis for what it is. We’re sleepwalking into a disaster.”
Harper nodded, gesturing for Callahan to take a seat. “I understand your concerns, Robert. Believe me, we are very aware of the challenges.”
“Are you?” Callahan snapped, not taking the offered seat. “Because it sure doesn’t seem like it. The numbers don’t add up for us. We’re staring down the barrel of another stolen election, and we don’t have a plan to fight back.”
Harper leaned forward, her gaze steady. “We have strategies in place. We’re mobilizing legal teams, preparing for every contingency. The president is aware, and we’re not taking this lightly.”
“But that’s not enough!” Callahan’s voice rose. “We need to pressure the Supreme Court now, before it’s too late. We know Steele’s camp is going to flood the courts with frivolous lawsuits if the results aren’t in their favor. We can’t wait until after the election to act.”
“How do you propose we do that?” Harper asked, her tone calm but firm. “The Supreme Court is supposed to be impartial. We can’t afford to be seen as trying to unduly influence it.”
Callahan stopped pacing and faced her, his eyes burning with intensity. “Impartial? You and I both know that’s a fantasy. Look at the makeup of the court. It’s tilted against us, and Steele’s team will exploit that. We need to rally public opinion, make it clear that we won’t stand for another stolen election. We need to be prepared for mass protests, civil disobedience, whatever it takes.”
Harper sighed, rubbing her temples. “Robert, we’re preparing for all scenarios. But calling for civil disobedience now could backfire. We need to keep our supporters engaged and ready to act, but not to the point of chaos.”
Callahan shook his head. “Elizabeth, if we don’t start taking this seriously, we’re going to lose. And it’s not just about this election — it’s about the future of our democracy. We can’t let Steele and his cronies destroy everything we’ve fought for.”
Harper stood, meeting Callahan’s gaze. “I hear you, Robert. And I promise you, we are doing everything we can. But we need to be smart about this. We can’t afford to lose credibility or give them ammunition to paint us as the aggressors.”
Callahan exhaled sharply, the anger in his eyes softening slightly. “I just don’t want us to look back and realize we didn’t do enough.”
“We won’t,” Harper said firmly. “But we have to be strategic. Trust me, we have a plan. And we need you on board, fighting with us, not against us.”
Callahan nodded slowly. “Alright, Elizabeth. But I’m holding you to that. No more playing it safe. We need to be bold.”
“Agreed,” Harper replied, extending her hand. “Together, we’ll make sure democracy prevails.”
As Callahan shook her hand, he felt a flicker of hope. The upcoming election year promised to be nasty and fraught with uncertainty, but knowing Elizabeth Harper was on their team reassured him. In the chaos that awaited, her steady presence was exactly what they needed.
As he left the West Wing, his thoughts were drawn back to climate change and the fact that he never talked about it with Elizabeth or anyone in Landon’s administration. As the planet teetered on the brink of ecological catastrophe, he saw the necessity for decisive and bold action on climate change. Yet, the prospect of such action seemed increasingly remote, thanks to the unyielding grip of the Supreme Court's conservative majority. Among their most devastating moves was the systematic dismantling of environmental protections, particularly their assault on the Environmental Protection Agency.
At the heart of this attack was the gutting of the Chevron Doctrine, which granted deference to federal agencies like the EPA in interpreting statutes where congressional intent was ambiguous. The Chevron Doctrine, established by the High Court in the 1984 case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., was a foundational principle of administrative law. It directed courts to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes they oversee, as long as those interpretations were reasonable. In 2024, the Supreme court significantly curtailed the Chevron Doctrine's scope, potentially reducing agencies' ability to interpret laws with flexibility. This shift increased the judiciary's role in determining the meaning of regulatory statutes, altering the balance of power between the judicial and executive branches and reshaping how laws were implemented across the nation. The Chevron Doctrine had been a cornerstone of environmental regulation, allowing the EPA to enact measures crucial for combating climate change. But with the Court's relentless undermining of this doctrine, the EPA's power to act effectively was severely limited.
Callahan viewed these judicial maneuvers as part of a broader strategy to render the presidency impotent when held by a non-conservative leader. The role, once a bastion of potential change, was reduced to that of a ceremonial figurehead. Without the power and opportunity for the next decade to appoint justices who could counterbalance the Court's rightward tilt, a Democratic president's ability to effect real change was stymied. In his view, the "six tyrants" were not just destroying democracy — they were derailing the fight against climate change, a battle Callahan believed was the defining issue of the era. Only amongst his inner-most circle, did he use the term six tyrants. He had seen this play out in state governments differently. He had witnessed the brazen and cynical abuse of power in Wisconsin, North Carolina, and Michigan where the Republican-controlled legislature had stripped the governor of many powers, solely to weaken the office for the incoming Democratic governor.
The erosion of the Chevron Doctrine exemplified a judicial philosophy that favored corporate interests and short-term economic gains over long-term environmental sustainability. Callahan found it bitterly ironic that, at a time when humanity needed unprecedented cooperation and innovation to avert ecological disaster, the nation's highest court was stifling progress and perpetuating division. This realization was devastating for him. He saw a future where the planet continued to warm, sea levels rose, and communities were displaced, all while the nation's leaders remained hamstrung by a judiciary hostile to the very idea of proactive governance. It was a future he refused to accept, yet one he felt powerless to change under the current political and judicial landscape. All of his frustrations were driven by this one issue.
Despite his deep commitment to the issue, Robert Callahan was convinced he couldn't stitch together a winning coalition or campaign centered on climate change. He saw the cause as fragmented and fraught with ideological divides, where immediate economic concerns often overshadowed long-term environmental needs. And worse there was no cultural or emotional coalition to build around the issue. Callahan lamented the lack of a unified vision, echoing Socrates' notion that "the greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be." The public discourse was filled with pretenses of concern, but lacked the genuine, collective will to act. He was reminded of Plato's allegory of the cave, where the people, chained in darkness, mistook the shadows on the wall for reality, ignorant of the world outside. Callahan saw a parallel between those prisoners and the public's inaction on climate change. Just as the cave's prisoners were blind to the truth beyond the cave, society remained shackled to distractions and illusions of progress — unwilling or unable to comprehend the full scope of the unfolding crisis. Climate change, although an existential threat, was abstract and distant to a society focused on immediate gratification and material gain. People might recognize the looming danger, but their ignorance of its severity made them slow to act, much like those still trapped in the cave, unaware of the light. Callahan feared that the citizens of the U.S. were not yet ready to confront this harsh reality, leaving him doubting the possibility of forging a unified movement powerful enough to confront both the opposing political forces and the Supreme Court's obstruction.
Karu Sankaralingam's A New Democracy is the kind of book that will make you want to throw it across the room—then pick it back up immediately. This is an intense, layered political thriller, grappling with contemporary issues like election integrity, judicial power, and the fragility of democracy. I was hooked by the witty dialogue and razor-sharp political maneuvering. This is an excellent book for fan of high-stakes politics, courtroom battles, and behind-the-scenes power plays, this one's for you.
Set against the backdrop of a highly contentious U.S. election, the novel follows Governor Robert Callahan, Chief of Staff Elizabeth Harper, Senator Charlie McBride, and Supreme Court Justice Marisol Reyes as they navigate a political landscape on the verge of collapse. As election night unfolds, claims of fraud, court challenges, and deep institutional corruption threaten to upend democracy itself. What follows is a desperate struggle for control—one that forces each character to question their principles, power, and the future they're fighting for.
If you've ever doom-scrolled your way through election night coverage, this book will feel eerily familiar. The tension is real, and the stakes couldn't be higher. Sure, it's fiction—but barely.
The book is politics-heavy, but it also has some wonderful characterization. The exploration of Callahan's personal struggles, including therapy sessions where he wrestles with his own motivations, adds depth and emotion to the narrative. All of the characters' internal conflicts and political dilemmas feel authentic, making them more than just mouthpieces for ideological debates.
Some sections, especially on judicial rulings, slow the pacing down. If you love political deep dives, you'll enjoy it—if not, you might find yourself skimming. You should also be aware that A New Democracy book leans hard into progressive politics. Steele, the right-wing candidate, is portrayed as a chaos agent with few redeeming qualities. While this will resonate with some readers, others may wish for a more nuanced depiction of political opposition.
A New Democracy is the perfect read for folks who live for election drama, Supreme Court decisions, and the behind-the-scenes chaos of Washington. If you enjoy shows like The West Wing, House of Cards, or The Newsroom, this book will be right up your alley. Final verdict? A New Democracy is a gripping, timely, and intelligent political thriller with strong characters, sharp insights, and high stakes that make it a compelling read.