The Trump Phenomenon: Tyranny in Full Swing
Introduction
The unthinkable has happened. A year after Donald Trump placed his hand on the Bible and completed an extraordinary return to power, the world’s oldest continuous democracy finds itself on life support. What was once dismissed as hyperbole by alarmed liberals has become the clinical diagnosis of seasoned political scientists: the United States has descended into what experts now term “competitive authoritarianism”—a system where elections still occur, but the ruling party manipulates the rules to ensure it never loses .
As an International Relations Analyst who has spent decades monitoring democratic backsliding from Budapest to Ankara, I can state with professional certainty that the United States is no longer a full democracy in the traditional sense. The scale and velocity of what Trump has accomplished in just twelve months have stunned even longtime observers of authoritarian regimes. This article examines how the Trump phenomenon represents tyranny in full swing—a methodical dismantling of democratic institutions wrapped in the rhetoric of America First nationalism .
Understanding the Landscape
The architecture of American democracy was designed with certain assumptions: that presidents would respect norms, that Congress would assert its authority, that courts would be obeyed, and that the civil service would remain professionally insulated from political whims. The Trump administration has systematically demolished each of these assumptions.
The Consolidation of Personal Power
Trump’s second-term approach differs dramatically from his first. The training wheels are off. The president now operates with the knowledge, confirmed by the Supreme Court during the 2024 campaign, that he enjoys immunity from prosecution for official acts. No predecessor ever possessed such assurance . This legal shield has unleashed Trump’s worst impulses.
The administration has pursued what political scientists label “executive aggrandizement”—the incremental, executive-led amassing of power that undermines democratic constraints . This operates on three interrelated levels: establishing the president as supreme within the executive branch, making the executive dominant over other government branches, and weakening societal constraints on presidential power .
The Attack on the Administrative State
The strategy was signalled well in advance. In 2021, JD Vance explicitly compared his ambition for government reform to US policy in postwar Iraq, calling for a “de-Baathification program” to replace civil servants with political loyalists . Today, that vision is reality. Thousands of federal employees have been fired, independent watchdogs purged, and government agencies eviscerated. Estimates suggest more than 300,000 federal workers have left in what observers call the Trump-era exodus, draining the government of top scientists, researchers, and analysts .
This isn’t governance reform—it’s institutional sabotage. When you fire experts and replace them with loyalists, you aren’t making government more efficient; you’re making it more pliable to authoritarian control.
The Weaponization of Justice
Perhaps most alarming is Trump’s transformation of the Department of Justice into his personal law firm. In October 2025, a message Trump sent to Attorney General Pam Bondi accidentally entered the public domain, instructing her to speed up prosecutions against three named political enemies: former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and California Senator Adam Schiff .
No other president has treated the Department of Justice this way. This represents a fundamental shift from “rule of law” to “rule by law”—where legal institutions become weapons for punishing opponents rather than neutral arbiters of justice .
Case Studies
Domestic Repression: Military on American Streets
The administration has deployed military troops onto the streets of Democrat-governed cities like Chicago and Portland without state or local approval, citing alleged crime waves for which evidence is lacking. Trump declares “Portland is burning to the ground” when protests remain confined to a single city block . The larger purpose appears to be voter intimidation in majority-Democratic areas ahead of midterm elections.
The administration has threatened to invoke the rarely used Insurrection Act—last employed during the 1992 Los Angeles riots—to give legal backing to domestic military deployment without state consent . This would effectively allow the president to use armed forces against American citizens who protest his policies.
Foreign Policy: The Interventionist President
Despite campaign promises of non-intervention, Trump has proven remarkably hawkish. During his first year back in office, the US carried out 493 military strikes—compared to 287 during Biden’s entire presidency and 558 during Trump’s first term . This administration is proving far more interventionist than its predecessors.
The January 2026 Caracas raid that removed Nicolás Maduro from power exemplifies the new approach: “shock and awe” operations designed to maximize impact while avoiding boots on the ground . One hundred fifty aircraft launched from twenty bases across the Western Hemisphere, executing a mission the administration frames as law enforcement rather than regime change .
Meanwhile, Trump has withdrawn the US from 66 international organizations, including the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change that underpins all global efforts to combat warming . The White House statement declared these entities “advance globalist agendas over US priorities”—a revealing phrase that treats international cooperation as inherently suspect .
The Peace-for-Profit Doctrine
Trump claims credit for resolving eight conflicts during his first year, from Gaza ceasefires to agreements between Armenia and Azerbaijan . But these “peace deals” carry an explicit economic dimension. Ukraine signed a Critical Minerals Deal in exchange for resumed intelligence sharing. The DRC-Rwanda agreement is formally titled the “Critical Minerals for Security and Peace Deal” .
This represents a fundamental reimagining of diplomacy: peace is no longer an intrinsic good but a transaction through which the US extracts resources and business opportunities.
Implications and Consequences
Democratic Erosion by the Numbers
Quantitative assessments paint a bleak picture. The Century Foundation’s democracy indexing project found a staggering 28% “collapse” in US democratic health over the past year—from 79/100 in 2024 to 57/100 in 2025, a decline typically associated with coups or major shocks . Bright Line Watch, a nonpartisan monitoring initiative, rates US democracy at 54 on a 100-point scale, placing the country closer to illiberal regimes than to G7 peers like Canada or Britain .
A network of former intelligence professionals applied the same analytical methods once used to assess foreign democracies to the United States, concluding with “moderate to high confidence” that the country is “on a trajectory” toward authoritarian rule .
The Oligarchic Dimension
Scholars of contemporary authoritarianism express particular concern about Trump’s relationship with tech billionaires—the so-called “broligarchy.” Elon Musk’s appointment to lead the “Department of Government Efficiency” gave an oligarch unprecedented access to Treasury payment systems and data infrastructure of a superpower . As historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat observes, “We are innovating the autocratic playbook” .
Traditionally, autocrats expand social services to buy loyalty while stripping political rights. Trump has diverged from this model, moving to “kneecap” public health and social programs while his billionaire allies gain unprecedented access to the levers of state power .
Theoretical Analysis
Competitive Authoritarianism Explained
The concept of “competitive authoritarianism,” developed by political scientists Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, describes regimes where democratic institutions exist but are systematically skewed in favor of incumbents. Elections are held, opposition parties operate, and media exists—but the playing field is so tilted that the ruling party rarely loses .
In Foreign Affairs, Levitsky, Ziblatt, and Way recently argued that the United States under Trump has crossed this threshold . This isn’t democracy with flaws—it’s a hybrid regime where democratic forms mask authoritarian substance.
Personalistic vs. Institutionalized Autocracy
Machiavelli warned that rule by princes was more prone to tyranny than institutionalized oligarchies. Contemporary research confirms that personalistic autocracies have substantially worse economic growth than either institutionalized autocracies or democracies . When power rests entirely on one individual rather than established institutions, predictability evaporates, and long-term planning becomes impossible.
Trump’s declaration that the only constraint on his power is “my own morality” encapsulates this personalistic vision . In a system of laws, this statement should be shocking. That it passes with minimal comment demonstrates how thoroughly norms have eroded.
The Role of International Organizations
Multilateralism Under Assault
Trump’s withdrawal from 66 international organizations represents more than symbolic nationalism. These exits deprive the United States of influence in forums that shape global rules on climate, health, trade, and security . When the US abandons the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, it doesn’t just avoid commitments—it cedes leadership to China and Europe in defining the future of global energy and environmental standards.
The administration’s justification reveals its worldview: these organizations promote “global governance” and “ideological programs” that conflict with US sovereignty . But global governance is simply the mechanism through which nations collectively address problems no single country can solve alone. Rejecting it doesn’t make problems disappear—it makes solutions impossible.
Allies as Adversaries
Trump’s approach to traditional allies has been transactional at best, hostile at worst. Threats to acquire Greenland by force, punitive tariff threats against European NATO members, and demands that allies increase defense spending while questioning whether the US would honor its Article V commitments have shattered transatlantic trust .
The Neue Zürcher Zeitung warns that “Trump has squandered the goodwill of many voters—and shaken the confidence of America’s allies” . When allies begin discussing whether to sell US government bonds as retaliation, the foundation of postwar international order shows cracks .
Strategies for Resistance
The Resilience of Civil Society
Despite the grim picture, resistance persists. In October 2025, thousands joined “No Kings” marches across the country, denouncing what they see as monarchical power . The ACLU reports nearly 65% success rate in “defeating, delaying, or diluting federal policies” through over 200 legal challenges .
In Minneapolis, when Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act against protests, hundreds of citizens registered for training to become “observers” of enforcement activity rather than retreating in fear . This is the behavior of people who understand that authoritarianism advances when citizens stay home.
The Electoral Path
Trump remains unpopular nationally—a CNN poll found 58% call his first year a failure, and his approval rating has dropped to 36% in some surveys . Democrats won successive victories in 2025 off-year elections and are well-positioned to retake the House in 2026 .
This creates a paradox: the administration accelerates authoritarian measures despite lacking majority support. The explanation lies in the nature of competitive authoritarianism—when you control the machinery of power, popular support becomes less essential.
International Pressure
European allies are recalibrating strategies. Former ambassador François Nordmann suggests revising the 1951 US-Denmark defense agreement to address Greenland concerns without sacrificing Danish sovereignty . The Neue Zürcher Zeitung urges Europe to “defend its principles and become more independent,” threatening counter-tariffs and restricted market access for US tech companies .
International pressure matters because authoritarian regimes crave external validation. When the community of democracies treats the United States as a backsliding state rather than a beacon, it imposes costs Trump’s transactional worldview may not have anticipated.
Conclusion and Summary
The Trump phenomenon represents tyranny in full swing—but not yet tyranny consolidated. The United States in 2026 occupies a liminal space, no longer a full democracy but not yet an outright autocracy. Whether it slides further depends on factors still in play: judicial independence, civil society mobilization, electoral outcomes, and international pressure .
What distinguishes the American case from Hungary or Turkey is the speed of erosion. Trump has pursued executive aggrandizement with striking momentum, weakening checks across multiple levels simultaneously . But the rootedness of US democratic institutions has thus far prevented the institutionalized changes that have locked in autocracy elsewhere .
The warning from scholars is clear: democratic decline is reversible, but only if citizens believe in its continued viability and fight to defend it . Fatalism itself accelerates backsliding. When people conclude resistance is futile, they prove themselves correct.
Trump’s own words capture the stakes. When asked about constraints on his power, he replied: “my own morality” . In a democracy, constraints on power should never rest on any single individual’s morality. They should rest on institutions, laws, norms, and the eternal vigilance of citizens who understand that freedom requires constant defense.
The world is watching. For two centuries, the American experiment inspired democrats everywhere. Today, it serves a different purpose: a warning that even the most established democracies can backslide, that authoritarianism doesn’t always arrive with tanks and secret police—sometimes it comes with rallies and hashtags, claiming to drain swamps while flooding the zone with shit . The question is whether Americans will recognize what’s happening before it’s too late.
