Introducing the "US Authoritarian Barometer"

Hello! Back after doing some “thought structuring” and gathering the sources I needed…

In this piece, I try to set a frame for a discussion, that I know will be ongoing for at least as long as Trump is in power in the US, and that will hopefully not be reproduced in any more European countries going forward…

The idea is to follow moves in the US towards an authoritarian system, slowly (or rapidly!?) deteriorating the conditions for a democracy to function properly.

To do so, I suggest to start with going through definitions. How do we define a Democracy, Authoritarianism, Totalitarianism, etc. so that we stick to focusing on what are the most relevant features for the current situation, even though, we know it’s a moving target.  

Thereafter, we will look at what defined Trumpism during his first mandate, that set a frame for what he is now rolling out 8 years later.

That will be followed by a fast review of main characteristics that define an authoritarian regime, before turning to a quick discussion on Truth and Lies.

I will thereafter set up an interactive page in the blog for those who wish to help track the development of 7 factors (see at the end of the piece), that constitute pillars for a democracy. Please feel free to express your views on the set-up of that page, as well on the 7 factors (anyone missing?)!

1.    Definitions

Before discussing main features of an authoritarian regime and thereafter check how Trump’s administration moves in that direction, in the future page “Live US Authoritarian barometer”, let us start by simply defining different political systems, that are at the heart of the discussion and understand why we concentrate on Authoritarianism as the most adapted to the ones, that inspire Heritage Foundation and Trump.

In order to be consistent, I have chosen to use definitions from he French Academy’s dictionary.

·      Democracy

Democracy is a political system based on five pillars: respect for fundamental freedoms, separation of powers, holding of free and regular elections, popular sovereignty, and political pluralism.

According to the French Academy’s dictionary:

A system of political organization in which sovereignty and the decisions that result from it are theoretically or actually exercised, directly or indirectly, by the people, that is, by all citizens. Athenian democracy was the first known democracy. Democracy places the origin of power in the will of the citizens and subjects its exercise to their majority vote. Democracy is based on the principle of the equality of citizens.

·      Populism

Attitude, behavior of a man or a political party which, against the ruling elites, poses as defender of the people and spokesperson for their aspirations, putting forward ideas which are most often simplistic and demagogic.

·      Extremism

A system supporting of the most cutting-edge ideas and solutions.

·      Autocracy

Form of government where the sovereign exercises absolute power/

·      Authoritarianism

The way in which a person or organization acts when it abuses its authority.

·      Totalitarianism

A political system characterized by the all-powerful state that claims to govern both public and private life. According to Carl Joachim Friedrich, a German political scientist, totalitarianism is based on the abolition of the rule of law, the use of violence, the establishment of a single party, and economic interventionism. National Socialism and Communism were the two major totalitarianisms of the 20th century.

·      Oligarchy

A form of government where sovereign authority is held by a small number of individuals, families., ie the oligarchy of Sparta.

·      Plutocracy

State of a society in which the richest exercise political power or enjoy a preponderant influence.

·      Tyranny

Government by a person who exercises supreme power arbitrarily and absolutely, in defiance of the laws and flouting liberties.

·      Fascism

Doctrine or political regime of totalitarian and nationalist inspiration, comparable to Italian fascism or inspired by it.

• Illiberal Democracy

This is an Ad-on based on a comment by PL, that this new terminology is more and commonly used to define, according to Wikipedia, a governing system that hides its "nondemocratic practices behind formally democratic institutions and procedures". Among other, the independence of the judiciary is being undermined, and citizens do not benefit from equal treatment before the law, nor from sufficient protections against the State or private actors. There is a lack of consensus among experts about the exact definition of illiberal democracy, however, it may be used broadly to refer to the notion that some governments attempt to look like democracies while suppressing opposing views 

What definitions above fit the two main rival powers to the US, ie China and Russia, that have been on the US administrations’ mind for over 50 years (80 in the case of Russia)?

First thing, both are historically pure totalitarian one-party regimes. This is important to keep in mind, as the Chinese and Russian people living today have never lived in anything else than Totalitarianism.  

China has recently gone back to a combination of Totalitarianism and Autocracy, with the reinforcement of powers of XI Jinping, a move that reminds of Mao’s position in his time.

Russia, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, has developed into another sort of Totalitarianism, that mixes Autocracy, with Putin having a total control over the State, and a Plutocracy.

As all know, their common hate for democracy and Western values is the main ideological common denominator.

So, even though we could spend pages on other authoritarian countries, let’s concentrate on our main worries, that is are the US turning into an Autocracy?

Let’s first agree, on the basis of the definitions above, on the following:

a.     Trump has been elected in regular way in a Democracy

b.     Trump and his sponsors/supporters have a populistic discourse

c.   His new administration is totally made up of loyalists, favoring the implementation of an authoritarian system, starting with the Republican party’s so far totally aligned attitude behind its leader.

d. The illiberal democracy, as defined above seems to correspond to what is going on as well.

e.     The speed with which the Big Tech’s founders and owners pledged allegiance from the first moment, as well as the role played by Musk make it quite easy to see a Plutocracy already in place.

On the other side, there is as of yet no one-party system in the US, which eliminates any totalitarian structure at the moment, and the question of Oligarchy will be clarified over time (is Trump’s ultimate goal to create a Dynasty, that would try to keep the power?). In the same way, we are still far from a fascist system, even though the hard-line right-wing extremists who support Trump are neo-nazis for many. Not to omit Musk’s and Bannon’s Heil Hitler gestures in two different official happenings!!

2.    Trumpism 2017-2021

Even though Trump is not the sole engine behind the United States potential move away from democracy, as it originates from the growing influence over time of neo-conservative think tanks and Foundations such as Heritage, he clearly has all features needed to qualify for a wannabe Authocrat.

In order to understand the speed at which things are moving now, let’s get back to the first Trump mandate, when the President was slowed down, sometimes controlled by an administration, that was not hand-picked by himself.

The best source, that I’ve found for this part comes from a book called « The Death of Truth » by Michiko Kakutani (1). How did truth become an endangered species in contemporary America? This decline began decades ago, and in this book, former New York Times critic Michiko Kakutani takes a penetrating look at the cultural forces that contributed to this gathering storm. In social media and literature, television, academia, and politics, Kakutani identifies the trends—originating on both the right and the left—that have combined to elevate subjectivity over factuality, science, and common values. And she returns us to the words of the great critics of authoritarianism, writers like George Orwell and Hannah Arendt, whose work is newly and eerily relevant. An excellent book, that I can strongly recommend!

In order to try to summarize parts of the book, I below present, in a table, the main features, that arose within the Trump and neo-conservative circles, in opposition with what characterized previous US administrations and values more generally…

In the age of Trumpism, there is Opposition between

Rationalism                                                      and…	Nihilism (in Washington)
Tolerance	Racial and religious intolerance
Empiricism	Detestation of Government
Enlightenment: « Rule of Reason » Reason, Liberty, Progress, Religious tolerance, Faith in Science	Embrace of Conspiracy theories and misinformation Offering scapegoats instead of solutions
Common Facts vs	Emotion and fear
Truth : ð Objective ð Empirical ð Evidence -based	Relativism Misinformation Bad Faith Insincerity
Common baseline of facts, shared reality vs	Different information universes
Expertise vs	Wisdom of the crowd
Fact vs fiction	The reality of experience
True vs false	The standard of thought
Fact vs Opinion	Informed argument vs speculation
Postmodernism : Objective reality existing independently from human perception vs	« Knowledge » is filtered through the prism of class, race, gender and other variables
Truthful vs	Neutral (Journalists)
Facts, morality, decency vs	Party loyalty and tribal politics, Partisan divides
	Redefine reality, violation of norms, rules and traditions

Do authoritarian figures have common characteristic features? In the case of Trump, he can easily (and commonly) be qualified as narcissistic, fake, ignorant, liar, boorish, demagogue, with tyrannical impulses. He is very far from the cold and controlled figures of Xi Jiping and Putin… But he has in common with them the taste for exclusive power, and a total absence of empathy! A very important feature in the case of Trump, is his need for revenge against all people and forces, that not only tried to contain him but also proved his implications in illegal acts.

As Michiko Kakutani puts it:

“Trump is a troll both by temperament and by habit.

His tweets and offhand taunts are the very essence of trolling – the lies, the scorn, the invective, the trash talk and the rabid non sequiturs of an angry, aggrieved, isolated, and deeply self-absorbed adolescent who lives in a self-constructed bubble and gets the attention he craves from bashing his enemies and trailing clouds of outrage and dismay in his path.”

On Anne Applebaum’s defining the « Neo-Bolsheviks »: Trump, Nigel Farage, Marine Le Pen, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, Viktor Orban. They have adopted Lenin’ refusal to compromise, his anti-democratic elevation of some social groups over others and his hateful attacks on « illegitimate » opponents. They believe, that ordinary morality does not apply to them… In a rotten world, truth can be sacrificed in the name of « the People » or as a means of targeting “Enemies of the People”.

3.    Characteristics of authoritarianism

Karen Stenner, a behavioral economist who began researching personality traits two decades ago, has argued that about a third of the population in any county has what she calls an authoritarian predisposition, a word, that is more useful than personality, because it is less rigid. An authoritarian predisposition, one that favors homogeneity and order, can be present without necessarily manifesting itself; its opposite, a « libertarian » predisposition, one that favors diversity and difference, can be silently present too. Authoritarianism appeals, simply, to people who cannot tolerate complexity: there is nothing intrinsically « left-wing » or « right-wing » about this instinct at all. It is anti-pluralist. It is suspicious of people with different ideas. It is allergic to fierce debates. Whether those who have it ultimately derive their politics from Marxism or nationalism is irrelevant. It is a frame of mind, not a set of ideas.

 Authoritarianism goes hand in hand with Populism.

o   Reasons for the rise of populism

Once again, there are many books elaborating on this topic, so let us just try to put it simply, not to spend too much time on a well-known subject.

What brings people to follow an autocrat? Cynicism and wariness and fear can make people susceptible to the lies and false promises of leaders bent in unconditional power.

Nationalism, tribalism, dislocation, fears of social change, and the hatred of outsiders are on the rise again as people, locked in their partisan silos and filter bubbles, are losing a sense of shared reality and the ability to communicate across social and sectarian lines.

Around the world, waves of populism and fundamentalism are elevating appeals to fear and anger over reasoned debate, eroding democratic institutions and replacing expertise with the wisdom of the crowd.

o   Cultivating Anger

In «Les Ingénieurs du Chaos», (2), Giuliano da Empoli states, that “by cultivating individual anger without regard for the coherence of the whole, the Authoritarian leader and his organization dilute old ideological barriers and reframe political conflict on the basis of a simple opposition between the "people" and the "elites." In the case of Brexit, as well as in that of Trump and Italy, the success of national populists is measured by their ability to explode the left/right divide to capture the votes of all angry people, not just the fascists”.

“In the eyes of their voters, the flaws of populist leaders are transformed into strengths. Their inexperience is proof that they do not belong to the corrupt circle of elites, and their incompetence is a guarantee of their authenticity. The tensions they generate at the international level are an illustration of their independence, and the fake news that punctuates their propaganda is a mark of their freedom of thought.”

o   Extremism

What is the role of the far-right in the present context?

In “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America” (3), the veteran journalist Chris Hedges analyses the trivialization of the far-right groups in the US, excerpt:

“The passivity of many Americans, who underestimate the danger inherent in fascist rhetoric and moral fragmentation, fosters a carefree view that these extremists are essentially decent people whose words transcend thought and who would never go so far as to persecute homosexuals or murder doctors who perform abortions. Such apathy only precipitates the possibility of evil. People are not born extremists; they become so gradually. In an open society, extremists advance cautiously. But they advance only because they encounter no resistance. And no society is immune to moral catastrophe ».

In a « still » democratic society such as the US, these groups are today not only tolerated, but used as “spear-heads” in the ideological war, that the autocratic leader and his “gang” fights with the establishment.

o   Replacing first-rate talents with “crackpots and fools”

In the “Origins of Totalitarianism” (4), Hannah Arendt writes about one-party systems, that unlike an ordinary oligarchy, allow for upward mobility: true believers can advance – a prospect especially appealing to people whom the previous regime or society had not promoted. Arendt observed the attraction of authoritarianism to people who feel resentful or unsuccessful back in the 1940s, when she wrote, that the worst kind of one-party state « invariably replaces all first-rate talents, regardless of their sympathies, with those crackpots and fools whose lack of intelligence and creativity is still the best guarantee of their loyalty. »

We may be far from a one-party system in the US, but the Trump administration definitely looks like one of those teams! Thus, Trump and his sponsors have gone faster and further than any other autocratic system has done so far, while still functioning in an open democracy!!

o   Dismantling of Institutions

No need here to comment further on Elon Musk and his rogue bunch of teenagers within DOGE trying to tear US federal institutions and regulators apart!

As Michiko Kakutani expressed it in « The Death of Truth »:

« Almost a century after his death, Lenin’s model of revolution has proven frighteningly durable. His goal – not to improve the state machine but to smash it and all its institutions – has been embraced by many 21st century populists. »

This is extremely interesting, as it is one of the very common features between communism and far-right autocracies! And a clear big part of Program 2025 by Heritage Foundation.

It is also one of the clear factors to cover and measure through our US Autocratic Barometer!

o   Taking control over the Judicial system

We now know, that Trump and his administration are testing the lines and see how far they can go to move them. The end game is obviously to let the Executive power overrun the power of law. Thus, on March 15, 2025, the White House openly defied a court order blocking the expulsion of Venezuelan migrants… Controlling the judicial system is a prerequisite for authoritarian and totalitarian regimes to function, as history has showed so many times. Without freedom of justice, democracy falls apart!

o   The Destruction of Human Rights

In “The Origins of Totalitarianism”, Hannah Arendt explains that "the first essential step on the road to total domination is to kill the legal person in man.

The goal of an arbitrary system is to destroy the civil rights of the entire population, so that they end up being outlawed in their own country, just like the stateless and the homeless. The destruction of human rights, the assassination of the legal person in them, are a necessary prerequisite for complete domination."

Even though this feels very far from what we can even imagine, that we would witness in the US, both the USSR and Communist China both used that terrible tool, and we know, that Russia and even China still today use it sporadically and in targeted manners.

Nevertheless, the recent example in the US of the wish by the White House to “deport” a leader of Columbia University’s pro-Palestinian protest movement, despite him being a US citizen, shows, that we may not be that far away after all…

4.    Truth and Lies

As Barack Obama puts it: « One of the biggest challenges we have to our democracy is the degree to which we do not share a common baseline of facts: people today are operating in completely different information universes. »  

According to Giuliano da Empoli in “Les Ingénieurs du Chaos », “From the perspective of populist leaders, alternative truths are not simply a propaganda tool. Unlike real news, they constitute a genuine vehicle for cohesion.

In practice, for populist followers, the veracity of individual facts does not matter. What is true is the message as a whole, which corresponds to their experience and feelings. In light of this, there is no point in accumulating data and corrections if the overall vision of governments and traditional parties continues to be perceived by a growing number of voters as irrelevant to reality.”

In “The Death of Truth”, Michiko Kakutani cites Neil Postman in « Amusing Ourselves to Death”, who writes on Orwell and Huxley:

Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information.

Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism.

Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us.

Huxley feared that the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance

o   Fake News

This is an evident cause for the spreading of the extremist “viruses”. There are books and books written on the subject and the idea is not to analyze it here, but one thing is worth mentioning, found in “Les Ingénieurs du Chaos” by Giuliano da Empoli:

A recent MIT study showed that false information is, on average, 70% more likely to be shared online because it is generally more original than true information. According to researchers, on social media, the truth takes six times longer than fake news to reach 1,500 people. We finally have scientific confirmation of Mark Twain's quote: "A lie can circle the earth in the time it takes the truth to put on its shoes."

As an example of how far the use of Fake News can go and be admitted as such by the ones who use it, the following is stunning!

During the Republican National Convention in 2016, the CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota asked Newt Gingrich about Trump’s dark, nativist law-and-order speech, which inaccurately depicted America as a country beset by violence and crime, and she was sharply rebuted by the former Speaker of the House : « I understand your view, but the current view is that liberals have a whole set of statistics which theoretically may be right, but it’s not where human beings are. People are frightened. People feel that their government has abandoned them. »

Camerota pointed out that the crime statistics weren’t liberal numbers, but came from the FBI. The following exchange took place:

Gingrich: No, but what I said is equally true. People feel it.

Camrota: They feel it yes, but facts don’t support it.

Gingrich: as a political candidate, I’ll go with how people feel and I’ll let you go with the theoreticians.

o   Totalitarian language

This is an essential feature in understanding how and why people are manipulated.

In « Le Laboureur et les Mangeurs de Vent » (5), Boris Cyrulnik, a French psychiatrist and author describes the way language itself is distorted into a tool to control instead of an organ of relationship:

“To reflect on totalitarian language is to identify the words that take over our thoughts. All language of the body and of words gives form to what we feel much more than to what is. Every word reveals the segment of the world it illuminates. We are sincere when we allow ourselves to be carried away by the stories, which, like a spotlight, reveal what they illuminate. This is why we feel the obvious need to eliminate those who do not see the same world as we do.

This language implies not only the elimination of adversaries, but also the eradication of any divergent vision.

When language is no longer rational, when it no longer serves to express feelings or to elaborate a reason, it becomes a magical incantation aimed at planting in the mind of the others a dazzling representation, all at once, never elaborated, a simple affirmation aimed at governing their mental world. Language, with a hammer blow, is no longer an organ of relationship; it becomes an instrument of control that seizes power through conformity and grafts slogans in place of thoughts. This is why, in all dictatorships, those who use words to think are considered enemies. They must be distrusted, reeducated, and, if necessary, eliminated.

Nowadays, when people are infantilized, they internalize the law of the strongest and attribute moral value to it.”

This is a field, that would be worth spending time on, to find tools to analyze early changes in the political elites’ language towards messages aimed at taking control of our thoughts!

o   Propaganda

Hitler devoted whole chapters of « Mein Kampf » to the subject of propaganda:

Appeal to peoples’ emotions, not their intellects; use « stereotyped formulas » repeated over and over again; continuously assail opponents and label them with with distinctive phrases or slogans that will elicit visceral reactions from the audience.

Gary Kasparov tweeted in Dec 2016: «The point of modern propaganda isn’t only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth ».

In 2025, propaganda is another word for the “tilted” or Fake news, that are shared by the media close power as well as the social networks relaying them.

o   Conspiracy theories

Here again, Hannah Arendt defines it well in “The Origins of Totalitarianism”:

“The emotional appeal of a conspiracy theory is in its simplicity. It explains away complex phenomena, accounts for chance and accidents, offers the believer the satisfying sense of having special, privileged access to the truth. For those who become the one-party’s state’s gatekeepers, the repetition of these conspiracy theories also brings another reward: power”.

As a final word and conclusion when it comes to this section, George Orwell wrote in a 1943 essay: « What is peculiar to our own age is the abandonment of the idea that history could be truthfully written. In the past, people deliberately lied or they unconsciously colored what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing, that they must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that facts existed and were more or less discoverable. It is just this common basis of agreement with its implication that human beings are all one species of animal, that totalitarianism destroys. Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as the truth exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as science. There is only German science, Jewish science, etc… When truth is so fragmented, so relative, a path is opened for some Leader or some ruling clique to dictate what is to be believed: If the Leader says of such and such event, It never happened, well, it never happened ».

5.    Where do we stand today in the US and what’s next?

The idea from hereon, is to follow up with our upcoming “Live US Autocracy barometer”.

To do so, we will try to track developments when it comes to:

o   Civil rights

o   Individual rights

o   Freedom of Expression

o   Freedom of the Press

o   Censorship

o   Freedom of Justice

o   Dismantling of Institutions

o   Any other idea or anything I’ve omitted?????

Next step will thus be a “Live US Autocratic barometer” in the blog.

Stay connected, to be followed…

Sources:

1: “The Death of Truth” by Michiko Kakutani, 2018 by Tim Duggan Books

2: “Les Ingénieurs du Chaos” by Giuliano da Empoli 2019 by JC Lattès

3: “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America”, by Chris Hedges, 2021 by LUX CANADA

4: "The Origins of Totalitarianism”, by Hannah Arendt, 1973 by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich

5: « Le Laboureur et les Mangeurs de Vent », by Boris Cyrulnik, 2022 by Odile Jacob