SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
rule of law
The Real-Time Demise of American Democracy Under Trump
Our democracy is no longer guaranteed—from Wall Street to the White House, power is slipping into the hands of a few oligarchs at the expense of working people and ordinary families.
Oct 06, 2025
For generations, Americans have been taught that the United States is the world’s beacon of democracy. Politicians across the spectrum speak of the nation as a “shining city on a hill,” a place where freedom and the rule of law set the standard for the rest of the world. But the truth is harder to swallow: the U.S. is drifting away from liberal democracy and toward authoritarianism.
A survey of more than 700 political scientists conducted by Bright Line Watch in 2020 found that the vast majority believe the U.S. is rapidly moving toward some form of authoritarian rule. Scholars rated American democracy on a scale from zero (complete dictatorship) to 100 (perfect democracy). After Donald Trump’s first election in November 2016, they gave it a 67. Several weeks into his second term, the score had plunged to 55. Elections, rights, and freedoms are under attack—and America is running out of time to save its democracy. The experts’ warnings are not abstract; they reflect a country where voter suppression, gerrymandering, corporate influence, a compliant Supreme Court, and executive overreach are eroding the foundations of democratic governance. When citizens are uninformed—or choose not to vote—the systems of power tilt toward elites, making it easier for authoritarian forces to consolidate control. Authoritarian forces also thrive on fear—fear of immigrants, political opponents, or anyone deemed an outsider—turning Americans against one another and eroding the inclusive ideals that once defined the nation as a melting pot.
One of the hallmarks of authoritarian systems is the concentration of power in a single office. In the US, the presidency has been steadily amassing authority for decades. Presidents of both parties have expanded executive power—from Woodrow Wilson, who during and after World War I oversaw a massive expansion of federal authority, centralized control over the economy, and signed the Espionage and Sedition Acts to suppress dissent, to more recent administrations. After September 11, 2001, Congress handed the executive branch sweeping powers through the Authorization for Use of Military Force, essentially giving presidents a blank check for war. Since then, presidents have increasingly governed through executive orders and “emergency” declarations, bypassing Congress altogether. Barack Obama further expanded executive authority through extrajudicial drone strikes, targeting individuals abroad without judicial review or due process, demonstrating that executive power can be exercised unilaterally and with limited accountability. Meanwhile, Congress has been paralyzed by polarization and gridlock, leaving lobbyists and corporate donors to fill the vacuum. The Senate’s structure, which gives Wyoming and California the same representation despite a 70-fold population difference, allows minority rule to dominate national policy. Gerrymandering and voter suppression further hollow out electoral accountability. A government that concentrates power in the executive while undermining the voice of ordinary citizens is not functioning as a democracy.
Wake up, America! It’s one thing to recognize the nation’s slide toward authoritarianism and complain about it—it’s another entirely to take action.
Authoritarian governments also justify extraordinary powers in the name of “security.” The U.S. is no exception. The National Security Agency’s mass surveillance programs, exposed by Edward Snowden in 2013, revealed a government that watches its citizens on a scale once unthinkable. At home, local police departments increasingly resemble military units, rolling out armored vehicles and tear gas against peaceful protesters. We saw this during Occupy Wall Street, Standing Rock, and Black Lives Matter uprisings. The deployment of force against citizens exercising their constitutional rights should alarm anyone who values democracy. Yet the normalization of militarized policing has created what philosopher Giorgio Agamben wrote as a “state of exception”—where emergency measures become everyday tools of governance.
Yes, Americans still enjoy constitutional rights—but too often these rights exist more on paper than in practice. Free speech? Tell that to whistleblowers like Chelsea Manning, Snowden, or Reality Winner, who were prosecuted under the Espionage Act for revealing government misconduct. Voting rights? They’ve been under relentless attack, especially since the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which gutted protections for minority voters. States have since imposed strict voter ID laws, purged voter rolls, and closed polling places in Black and Latino communities. Even fundamental rights like reproductive freedom are being stripped away. The Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade, unleashing a wave of state-level abortion bans. Millions of women and people who can become pregnant no longer have control over their own bodies. That’s not democracy; that’s state control of private life.
Another clear sign of authoritarian drift is the domination of politics by wealthy elites. Since the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision, corporations and billionaires have been able to pour unlimited money into elections. Political campaigns are dominated by super PACs and billionaire donors. Our democracy is no longer guaranteed—from Wall Street to the White House, power is slipping into the hands of a few. Political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page found in 2014 that “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy,” leaving ordinary voters almost powerless to shape the laws that govern them.
The authoritarian character of the United States cannot be understood solely within its borders. With more than 750 military bases worldwide and a defense budget larger than the next ten nations combined, the United States functions as a global empire. Military interventions—from Iraq to Afghanistan to drone strikes across the Middle East and Africa—have often been launched without meaningful Congressional approval. Empire abroad normalizes authoritarianism at home. Militarized policing, mass surveillance, and a bloated national security state are justified by the logic of “permanent war,” which also benefits defense contractors, private security firms, and other corporate interests that profit from endless conflict. As Hannah Arendt wrote, imperialism abroad often requires repression at home. That warning has become reality.
The United States still holds elections and maintains a written constitution, but appearances are misleading. The US still calls itself a democracy, but in practice, authoritarian forces are calling the shots. What makes American authoritarianism distinctive is its velvet glove: it is not a dictatorship in the classical sense but a regime where democratic symbols cloak undemocratic realities. Its most effective disguise is the illusion of freedom itself—an ideology of free market capitalism that promises choice while consolidating power in the hands of a few. Americans are told they live in the land of opportunity, yet the choices available to them—whether in the marketplace or at the ballot box—are increasingly constrained by corporate monopolies and two political parties beholden to the same economic elites. Recognizing this drift is the first step toward reversing it. Unless structural reforms are undertaken—curbing corporate power, restoring voting rights, protecting civil liberties, and demilitarizing both foreign and domestic policy—the United States risks cementing its place not as the defender of democracy but as an exemplar of its decline.
It is a bitter irony that 66,000 living World War II veterans—who risked everything to fight authoritarianism abroad—now witness the creeping authoritarianism at home and the steady erosion of the freedoms they fought to secure. Their sacrifices are a reminder that democracy is fragile and must be actively defended.
Unless structural reforms are undertaken—curbing corporate power, restoring voting rights, protecting civil liberties, and demilitarizing both foreign and domestic policy—the United States risks cementing its place not as the defender of democracy but as an exemplar of its decline.
Democracy is not self-sustaining. If Americans care about preserving freedom, they must act: vote in every election—from school boards to city councils to state legislatures—and recognize that their power extends beyond the ballot box. As consumers and shareholders, they can choose carefully which corporations they support, amplifying businesses that align with democratic values while withdrawing support from those that undermine them. Citizens can also engage directly with elected officials, starting meaningful discussions to make their voices heard, and volunteer with nonpartisan nonprofit advocacy organizations and watchdog groups that protect the democratic process, civil rights, and corporate and government accountability and transparency. Pushing for structural reforms that rein in executive power and corporate influence, challenging fear-mongering narratives, and defending the rights of marginalized communities are all essential steps to reclaiming and preserving democracy.
We each have a role to play. Wake up, America! It’s one thing to recognize the nation’s slide toward authoritarianism and complain about it—it’s another entirely to take action. Be no bystander; democracy depends on participation. We ignore its demise at our peril.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Loyalty Over Law: Trump’s Ultimatum to the Military
Trump's Quantico speech nudged the military toward personal loyalty over constitutional duty, encouraging officers to view American citizens as potential adversaries.
Oct 02, 2025
At Quantico this week, US President Donald Trump addressed the nation’s top military leaders and delivered a statement that might have sounded like a joke: “If you do not like what I am saying, you can leave the room, of course there goes your rank and your future.”
Generals and admirals, mostly white men with a handful of women and people of color, laughed—some nervously. Yet beneath the levity lies a profound departure from established norms. Loyalty to the Constitution was implicitly optional; loyalty to him was emphasized as paramount. Obey, or be discarded. This was not overtly menacing, but the danger lay in the implications—a subtle drift toward personal allegiance rather than institutional fidelity.
The Framers anticipated precisely this. James Madison warned that “the means of defense against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home.” George Washington cautioned that “overgrown military establishments” threaten liberty. US officers swear an oath not to a person but to a document: “I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic… that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.” Notably, the president is not mentioned. Trump’s remarks at Quantico nudged the military toward personal loyalty over constitutional duty.
He framed an “enemy within.” “America is under invasion from within… it’s more difficult because they do not wear uniforms,” he said, describing inner cities as “a big part of war,” and suggested US troops could use urban America as “training grounds.” “We are going to straighten out these cities one by one… you know, it’s a war from within… and this is going to be a big part of what many of you in this room are going to do. Controlling the physical security of our border is national security.” Cities like Chicago and Portland were singled out: “We are going into Chicago very soon. They have a stupid governor… They need the military desperately... look at Portland. It looks like a war zone. This looks like WWII. They do not have it under control. This place is a nightmare. They go after our ICE people.” The tone was casual, but the implications were stark: civilian populations could be reframed as adversaries, and the military’s domestic mission subtly redefined.
How far can this drift go before someone says, "No"? The answer will determine whether the United States maintains a professional, apolitical military loyal to the Constitution—or watches its military subtly repurposed for the ambitions of a single leader.
The speech meandered. Trump mocked former President Joe Biden’s autopen, disparaging the father of a fallen soldier, debated the type of paper for officer commissions, boasted about Africa and Gaza, and claimed he had “settled seven wars”—despite never serving in combat. Generals and admirals were asked to absorb these narratives alongside directives about fitness, grooming, and ideological conformity. One line crystallized the shift: “If it’s okay with you generals and admirals, if they spit, we hit.” Casual in tone, it nonetheless suggested the bending of rules of engagement to fit personal preference.
He framed merit as ideological conformity: “We went through political correctness… many people doing what you are doing were unfit… Kids with C averages were getting into the best colleges… Everything is based on merit now… we are not going to have someone take your positions for political reasons… this nation was built on merit… I give the Supreme Court so much credit for that decision… you can never be great with political correctness.” Merit became a tool for enforcing obedience, signaling that dissent could be equated with incompetence.
Trump’s rhetoric invoked martial bravado: “If we are as ruthless and relentless as our enemies, we will match anyone.” In context, this was less an immediate threat than a subtle call to normalize operational flexibility that blurs the line between foreign and domestic, combatant and civilian, obedience and principle.
History provides a cautionary parallel. Hitler’s 1934 Reichswehr oath: “I swear by God this holy oath, that I will render unconditional obedience to Adolf Hitler…” illustrates how personal loyalty can supplant institutional oath. Trump’s Quantico speech does not mirror Hitler, but it nudges in a similar structural direction: the implicit redefinition of allegiance.
Professionalism demands a different ethos. Civilian control presupposes accountability to law and Constitution, not to a single person. At Quantico, generals could have reaffirmed that principle by walking out. They did not.
The speech’s digressions reinforced this central pattern. Trump referenced George Soros, gangs from Venezuela, former President Barack Obama’s walk down Air Force One, black-and-white movies, battleships, tariffs, and even the Nobel Prize he thinks he deserves—bouncing from subject to subject, but always tethered to personal loyalty. Laughter punctuated moments of absurdity or partisanship, blurring the line between professional judgment and political theater.
The cost of the event is difficult to justify, particularly amid a government shutdown. On multiple occasions, Trump mocked political opponents, disparaged prior commanders, and indulged in self-aggrandizing boasts. The generals and admirals were spectators, asked to measure both competence and ideological alignment. It was, quite simply, a waste of their time and a waste of taxpayer money.
But make no mistake about it, Quantico serves as a warning not because of overt threats but because it demonstrates the slow erosion of institutional boundaries. Subtle, meandering, and sometimes humorous, the speech nonetheless nudged the military toward personal loyalty over constitutional duty, encouraging officers to view American citizens as potential adversaries. Civilian control of the military, once a safeguard against tyranny, risks inversion. For now, Trump does not command an army loyal only to him, but the vision is unambiguous: a force trained to see Americans as adversaries, guided not by law but by obedience to one man.
How far can this drift go before someone says, "No"? The answer will determine whether the United States maintains a professional, apolitical military loyal to the Constitution—or watches its military subtly repurposed for the ambitions of a single leader. At Quantico, the question was posed without overt force, but the implications could not be clearer: Obey, or lose everything.
Keep ReadingShow Less
We Must Fight Like Hell Against Trump's Authoritarianism
Trump's rising authoritarianism brings us to a more dangerous moment than any point in American history since the Civil War.
Oct 02, 2025
Make no mistakes about it, we are living in dangerous and unprecedented times as we combat Trump‘s oligarchy, authoritarianism, kleptocracy, and his horrific attacks against working families.
We have more income and wealth inequality than we've ever had; we have more corporate control of the media than we've ever had; we have more billionaire money buying elections than we've ever had.
We have a major housing and educational crisis, people are going to the grocery store and can't afford the food their families need, and we have a health care system that is completely broken.
Meanwhile, we have a president who is a pathological liar, who has little regard for the rule of law, who is suing media outlets that criticize him, threatening to jail his political opponents and talking about the military invading U.S. cities as practice.
History has always taught us that real change never takes place from the top on down. It always occurs from the bottom on up. It occurs when ordinary people get sick and tired of oppression and injustice—and fight back.
And on Tuesday night, as you know, the government shut down because—for the first time in modern history—Donald Trump and the Republican Party are approaching a budget conversation that requires 60 votes with a take it or leave it approach.
I will not take it.
I will not allow Donald Trump and the Republican Party to take away health care from 15 million people by making the largest cut to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act in history.
I will not allow Donald Trump and the Republican Party to increase health insurance premiums by 75 percent, on average, for over 20 million Americans who get their health care through the Affordable Care Act.
I will not allow Donald Trump and the Republican Party to fund this by giving a $1 trillion tax break to people like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, and the other oligarchs in the top 1 percent.
I will not allow Donald Trump and the Republican Party to undermine modern medicine and the health and well-being of our children by rejecting the scientific evidence regarding vaccines.
I will not allow Donald Trump and the Republican Party to allow this country to be moved toward authoritarianism by putting federal troops on city streets without a request from a governor or mayor.
I was asked ahead of the vote if I would just continue to vote NO over and over again until these issues are addressed, and you are damn right I will.
Donald Trump and my colleagues in the Republican Party may not stay up late at night worrying about people who can't afford health care, the medicine they need to survive, groceries and an education for their children, but I do.
Republicans will not have my vote to fund the government unless they find a sense of morality and do the right thing on health care, income and wealth inequality, and stopping Donald Trump's march toward authoritarianism.
I want the Republicans to go back to their districts and ask their constituents whether or not they believe it's a good idea to take away health care from millions of Americans to give Bezos and Musk a tax break.
I suspect they will not like the answer they hear.
So no. Republicans will not have my vote to fund the government unless they find a sense of morality and do the right thing on health care, income and wealth inequality, and stopping Donald Trump's march toward authoritarianism.
Until that happens it is important for all of us to stand up and make our voices heard.
Will it be easy? Of course not.
Is it possible? Only if everyone does their part.
Let me remind you, history has always taught us that real change never takes place from the top on down. It always occurs from the bottom on up. It occurs when ordinary people get sick and tired of oppression and injustice—and fight back. That is the history of the founding of our nation, the abolitionist movement, the labor movement, the civil rights movement, the women’s movement and more.
Sisters and brothers, we are living in dangerous times. Maybe more dangerous than any point in American history since the Civil War.
But this is a struggle that, for ourselves and future generations, we cannot lose.
Let us go forward together in solidarity
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular