Notes on American Authoritarianism

Competitive Authoritarianism

Definition: A system where elections occur, and the opposition is legal and competes for power, but the state apparatus is systematically weaponized against critics and rivals, creating an uneven playing field.
Differs from traditional authoritarianism: Elections are held; opposition is not always locked up.
Elections may occasionally be won by the opposition, but the abuse of state power tilts the field.
Post-Cold War Phenomenon: Became widespread after the collapse of communism when electoral legitimacy became globally dominant.
Formal authoritarian regimes without elections have decreased, while multi-candidate elections for the executive are now common in authoritarian states.

The speakers argue that the second Trump administration poses a greater risk to democracy than the first.
In the first term, Trump was an outsider with limited allies and was forced to rely on establishment figures committed to the democratic system.
Career government officials constrained some of Trump's worst impulses.
Now, Trump has consolidated control over the Republican Party, which is willing to do anything he asks.
Trump is governing with loyalists, not skilled technocrats or mainstream politicians.
There are fewer checks on his behavior, giving him greater room to maneuver.

Authoritarians in competitive systems begin by purging the Civil Service to attack opposition and undermine their ability to compete.
Modern democracies developed measures to restrict politicians' ability to politicize the state and create an arms-length relationship between bureaucrats and partisanship.
Attacking the independent bureaucracy is a key step in creating an authoritarian regime.
The state is wielded against opponents, often in constitutional ways.
Examples: Orban in Hungary, Hugo Chavez, and Erdogan.
Trump explicitly stated his intentions to use the state against his political enemies.

Americans struggle to envision authoritarianism due to a lack of experience with it in the modern era.
There is a false sense of complacency based on the perceived failures of Trump's first term.
Complacency is similar to the opposition to vaccines: people haven't experienced the negative consequences of authoritarianism.
Americans tend to whitewash their past, ignoring historical democratic deficits such as Jim Crow and McCarthyism.
No democracy as rich or old as the U.S. has ever broken down.
Social scientists may underestimate the risk of democratic breakdown in the U.S.

Weaponization of the bureaucracy: Prosecuting opposition groups, using defamation suits and investigations to tilt the playing field.
Purge of the civil service: Replacing independent bureaucrats with loyalists.
Co-optation: Using the state to create inducements for compliance from businesses and potential opponents.

Media companies are part of larger conglomerates vulnerable to pressure by the government.
Businesses may openly ally with the administration to benefit from favorable relations.
Settlements of defamation suits may lead to self-censorship by the media and mitigation of criticism of the administration.

Some competitive authoritarian regimes use political thuggery, violence, and intimidation to silence civil society and threaten politicians.
These actions are often shielded by the judiciary, which turns a blind eye to illegal behavior.
The U.S. already has a large and armed extremist fringe, and threats against politicians and judges have increased.
Trump's pardoning of January 6th insurrectionists sends a signal that such behavior is tolerated.
Vigilantes and other groups can provide plausible deniability to the regime.

While defections from the ruling coalition can lead to the breakdown of competitive authoritarian regimes, the career costs of opposing Trump are enormous.
Principled conservatives who have stood up for the rule of law have seen their career prospects destroyed.
Internal opposition to Trump is likely to be a career killer, discouraging large numbers of Republicans from defecting.
The Overton window continues to shift in an authoritarian direction.
Defections may occur if Trump becomes highly unpopular, but he currently remains the most popular Republican.

The degree of political polarization and the stability of party identification in the U.S. may offer some protection against authoritarianism.

The 2028 election could be affected by voter intimidation tactics and the government's use of carrots and sticks to influence the private sector.
There may be concerns about potential IRS audits for those donating to Democratic candidates.
Intimidation may weaken the Democratic Party, but the U.S.'s developed capitalist economy, wealth distribution, and strong legal system make it harder for Trump to be completely successful.

The depletion of societal opposition to authoritarianism may be worse than it appears.
Key political players sideline themselves, politicians retire, and university presidents resign.
Potential opposition may never materialize due to the threatening environment.
Weariness, fear, exhaustion, and resignation can push people toward the sidelines.
The actions of powerful figures like Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg can be paralyzing.
Individuals prioritize their own interests and organizations, leading to a weakened civil society.

Opposition is ongoing through the legal system and actions by state attorney generals.
Trump's governing style and potential missteps may lead to catastrophic outcomes and revive outrage.

Allegations that Democrats weaponized the state are used to justify purging and packing the state.
These claims should be evaluated by reputable organizations and scholars.
Authoritarians often claim that the state has been subverted or infiltrated by dangerous elements.

A constitutional crisis, where courts do not accept Trump's actions as legal, would be a relatively better outcome.
Resistance and constitutional crises may be optimistic outcomes.
Increased opposition and the willingness to stand up to Trump are positive signs.
Mistakes by Trump could create greater opposition.

Opposition parties may be tempted to imitate the authoritarian culture.
Competing against an incumbent wielding the machinery of government is challenging.
Politics are changing rapidly due to authoritarian tactics and changes in media technology.
There will be debates about how dirty the Democrats should play and whether they should engage in authoritarian behavior.
Opposition parties must decide which lines they are willing to cross.