Finding Hope Beyond Trump’s Legacy

Is the damage caused by President Trump to American democracy irreversible?

This question has been on my mind recently, especially as some close acquaintances feel so disheartened by Trump’s tenure that they contemplate leaving the United States to start anew in Canada. I have attempted to reassure them by emphasizing that the current situation is not comparable to Germany in 1938.

They respond by pointing out that Germany in 1935 was also markedly different from what it became by 1938 — yet history shows how quickly authoritarianism can take hold.

In the post-Cold War context, authoritarianism rarely takes the overtly brutal form reminiscent of Hitler’s regime. Instead, it often manifests more subtly: a charismatic leader is elected democratically, then leverages that mandate to manipulate and undermine democratic institutions.

In such systems, elections still occur but are frequently compromised; media outlets lack full independence but are not entirely state-controlled; and repressive measures may not involve outright torture but include surveillance, financial penalties, and other forms of intimidation. Examples include Hungary under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Poland governed by the Law and Justice party, the Philippines during President Rodrigo Duterte’s administration, and India under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Various terms describe these regimes — competitive authoritarianism, managed democracy, or electoral autocracy — but they share the characteristic that elections remain consequential, and incumbents can be voted out.

While such 21st-century authoritarian leaders have gained influence in several countries, often fueled by responses to migration and social change, the broader historical trend appears unfavorable to autocrats.

This is partly due to structural weaknesses. Authoritarian leaders tend to surround themselves with yes-men who shield them from critical feedback, enabling poor policy decisions that can destabilize economies and societies. Lacking robust oversight, these regimes are prone to corruption and decline.

Throughout my career reporting on authoritarian regimes worldwide, I have frequently encountered leaders who seemed unassailable, even banning me indefinitely. Yet in most cases, it was the dictator’s grip on power that ultimately faltered, not my ability to report.