Introduction: The View from Indiana
All across the state of Indiana, in the quiet of a summer evening, a familiar ritual is underway. In living rooms, basements, and garages, people are hunched over a poster board. The sharp, chemical scent of permanent markers fills the air as they carefully letter the slogans of a movement that refuses to die: “DEMOCRACY IS NOT A SPECTATOR SPORT,” “Uphold the Constitution,” “Impeach, Convict, Remove.” These are the members of 50501, one of the primary groups organizing the relentless, peaceful, nationwide protests against an administration they see as a fundamental threat to the republic. Their plan is simple and deeply American: to keep yelling, keep posting, and keep calling until something changes.
At the very same moment, the state’s Governor, Mike Braun, stands at a podium, beaming with pride. He has just announced that all state and county law enforcement officers across Indiana will now formally assist federal ICE agents in detaining “illegal” immigrants. It is a move that deputizes local police as a tool of a federal administration’s most controversial and divisive policies, a stark display of state power aligning itself with an increasingly authoritarian executive.
This contrast—the quiet determination of the protestors in their garages and the smiling pride of a governor embracing a hardline federal agenda—is a perfect microcosm of the current American crisis. It is a nation at war with itself, a struggle between a citizenry clinging to democratic norms and a government that seems determined to dismantle them. The central, terrifying question that hangs in the humid Midwestern air is the one on every protestor’s lips: But will anything change? CAN anything change?
The answer seems increasingly grim when one observes the actions of the current administration. They are pursuing long-term, systemic changes—purging the civil service, capturing federal agencies, attacking the judiciary—that, even under the most optimistic schedule, will take anywhere from 10 to 20 years to fully implement. These are not the actions of a President who thinks he is only going to be in the office for four years. These are the actions of someone who plans to RULE, and to do so with an iron fist.
Part I: Naming the Beast – “Competitive Authoritarianism”
To understand the nature of the threat, we must first use the correct language. What is unfolding in the United States is not a prelude to a classic, 20th-century military coup. Democracy, as the Council on Foreign Relations notes, “does not die in the darkness so often anymore. It dies in the light, one election at a time.” In a landmark 2025 essay in Foreign Affairs, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way gave our current condition a precise, academic name: “competitive authoritarianism.”
This is a hybrid system, a political zombie that maintains the outward shell of democracy while its soul rots from within. Elections are still held, opposition parties are still legal, and the press is not formally abolished. But the game is rigged. The incumbent regime uses the full, awesome power of the “weaponized state” to systematically harass, intimidate, and disadvantage its opponents. Competition is real, but it is not fair. It is, as the authors note, the preferred model of modern autocrats from Viktor Orbán’s Hungary to Hugo Chávez’s Venezuela, and it is the path the United States is now on.
This is not the first time America has faced this internal sickness. In a remarkable 1948 essay in The Atlantic, written at the dawn of the Red Scare, the historian Julian P. Boyd recounted a story of Thomas Jefferson defending a bookseller arrested in Philadelphia for vending a “subversive” book. Jefferson’s response was not a legalistic defense, but a fiery sermon on the nature of a free society. “It is an insult to our citizens to question whether they are rational beings or not,” Jefferson wrote, “and blasphemy against religion to suppose it cannot stand a test of truth and reason. If M. de Bécourt’s book be false in its facts, disprove them; if false in its reasoning, refute it. But, for God’s sake, let us freely hear both sides, if we choose.”
Boyd was not just writing about Jefferson. He was using the founder’s timeless ideal as a weapon to attack the authoritarian tendencies of his own time: the “mounting demand for conformity,” the “wave of fear and distrust,” and the shameful acquiescence of a press that had “actually helped to produce the hysteria that would compel uniformity.” He was writing about the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC), a body that, like the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 that Jefferson fought, sought to criminalize dissent. The current moment is the third, and perhaps final, act in this recurring American drama. The authoritarian impulse that Jefferson faced and Boyd condemned has returned, this time with control of the executive branch itself.
Part II: The Autocrat’s Playbook
The slide into competitive authoritarianism follows a predictable, well-trodden path. A recent report from the Center for American Progress, drawing on global case studies, lays out the “autocrat’s playbook.” The current administration is following it page by page, executing a multi-front assault on the core pillars of the republic.
The first, and most crucial, step is the weaponization of the state. This requires purging the professional civil service and replacing competence with fealty. We saw a perfect, live-action example of this just this week. After a weak jobs report was released, President Punk did not question his own economic policies; he immediately fired the head of the agency that compiled the data, claiming the report was intentionally manipulated to make him look bad. It is the classic “kill the messenger” tactic, a direct assault on the integrity of an apolitical, data-gathering institution. This is a pattern repeated across the government. The story of Michael Feinberg, the 15-year conservative FBI veteran, is a case in point. He was forced to resign for the crime of being friends with a former agent critical of the President, facing what he called a “latter-day struggle session” where he would have been expected to “grovel, beg forgiveness, and pledge loyalty.” This purge is being systematized through the administration’s plan to reinstate “Schedule F,” a move that would strip civil service protections from tens of thousands of federal employees, allowing them to be replaced by an “army of loyalists” currently being vetted by the Heritage Foundation.
The second step in the playbook is ideological court capture. The American Progress report details how regimes in Hungary and Poland systematically stacked their courts with loyalists to neutralize judicial oversight, lowered retirement ages for judges to force them out, and packed constitutional tribunals to ensure favorable rulings. The Punk administration has pursued a similar path, relentlessly attacking the legitimacy of any judge who rules against it, calling for their impeachment, and seeking to transform the judiciary from an independent check on power into a rubber stamp for the executive.
The third step is the use of legislative obstruction and the creation of manufactured majorities. The playbook shows how authoritarian parties, when in the minority, use procedural rules to paralyze government, creating a crisis of dysfunction that they can then exploit, arguing that democracy itself is broken. Once in power, they use tactics like gerrymandering and the manipulation of election laws to entrench their rule, ensuring they can maintain power even without the support of a popular majority, as has been seen in India and Hungary.
Part III: The Putinization of the Presidency
This American slide into authoritarianism is not happening in a vacuum. As journalists and dissidents who have lived through the decay of other democracies, like Garry Kasparov and Anne Applebaum, have noted, the President’s methods are a direct echo of those used by modern autocrats, particularly Vladimir Putin. This is not just a stylistic similarity; it is the adoption of a specific and dangerous political technology.
Kasparov identifies the creation of a new oligarchy as a key parallel. This is not the old-fashioned system of the wealthy buying influence; it is the direct fusion of corporate wealth and state power. The appointment of figures like Elroy Muskrat to official, powerful government roles is a textbook example of Putin’s model, where the line between the billionaire class and the ruling class is completely erased, creating a “centaur” of money and power in the same hands.
Another key tactic is the use of the lie as a loyalty test. As Kasparov explains, a dictator’s constant, obvious falsehoods are not just meant to deceive the public. They are a tool to enforce fealty. By forcing his subordinates and allies to repeat and defend statements they know to be untrue—that the economy is the best ever, that a lost election was stolen, that a jobs report was faked—the leader tests their absolute, unquestioning loyalty. The lie becomes a sacrament of their devotion.
Applebaum notes that this is part of a broader, more insidious shift in the nature of our politics. The debate is no longer about policy—taxes, healthcare, infrastructure—but about existential, cultural questions of identity: “Who are Americans?” This shifts the political ground from issues where compromise is possible to zero-sum battles where vanquishing the enemy is the only goal. This all happens, she argues, in the context of “Autocracy, Inc.”—a growing international alliance of dictators in Russia, China, Iran, and elsewhere, who actively support and learn from one another in their shared goal of undermining the idea of democracy itself.
Part IV: The Human Cost – “Hazardous to Your Health”
This slide into autocracy is not an abstract political science debate. It has real, tangible, and life-threatening consequences. A 2019 report from the Council on Foreign Relations, titled “Autocracy is Hazardous to Your Health,” provides the stark, data-driven proof that when democracies decay, their citizens get sicker and die sooner.
The report, analyzing decades of global data from the respected V-Dem Project, found that when democracies backslide into autocracy, the health of their citizens suffers dramatically. Life expectancy has declined by an average of 2% in countries like Turkey and Venezuela that have recently made this transition. The reason is simple: without the pressure of fair elections or accountability to a free media, autocratic leaders have far less incentive to do the hard, expensive, long-term work of sustaining public health infrastructure. It is easier to maintain power through patronage, division, and propaganda than it is actually to improve the lives of their citizens.
The data shows that a nation’s “democratic experience” is a better predictor of positive health outcomes, particularly in reducing deaths from cardiovascular disease, than its GDP. The V-Dem Project had already designated the United States as an “autocratizing” nation back in 2019, even before the current administration’s most extreme actions. Recent studies linking the administration’s aggressive EPA rollbacks to increased rates of asthma and other respiratory illnesses, and the mental health crises in communities terrorized by hardline immigration policies, are the first tremors of this public health earthquake. The administration’s assault on our democratic institutions is a direct and measurable threat to our physical health and our lives.
A Call to Defend the Republic
The evidence is overwhelming, and the diagnosis is clear. The United States, a nation that once saw itself as a beacon of liberty, is on a well-documented path toward competitive authoritarianism, following a playbook used by autocrats globally and in America’s own darkest moments. As Garry Kasparov noted, almost every grievance the American colonists listed against King George III in the Declaration of Independence—from obstructing justice to inciting domestic insurrection—has been “simply resurrected in Trump’s behavior.”
This is the ultimate, tragic irony. A movement that drapes itself in the flag and claims the mantle of patriotism is, in fact, re-enacting the very tyranny that America was founded to oppose.
But this slide is not inevitable. As the report from American Progress makes clear, other democracies have faced this sickness and have fought their way back. The remedy is not simple, but it is clear. It requires a “whole-of-society response”—a coalition of citizens, journalists, labor unions, business leaders, and principled politicians from both sides of the aisle who are willing to put the defense of the Republic above partisan gain. The protests of 50501, born in the basements and garages of ordinary citizens, are a start. But as long as the President feels he can simply ignore them and go golfing, they are not enough. The choice facing the American people is no longer about left versus right; it is about democracy versus autocracy. The institutions are weakening, the norms are collapsing, and the time for complacency is over. The defense of the Republic is now in the hands of its citizens.
Your help is needed. You don’t have to march. You don’t have to make phone calls. All you need to do is care. Really, deeply, earnestly care.
Discover more from Chronicle-Ledger-Tribune-Globe-Times-FreePress-News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
