Authoritarianism: 14 Warning Signs
A Public Service Announcement
Are You Paying Attention?
History provides a roadmap of the subtle and overt steps that mark a nation's slide into authoritarianism. This is a public service announcement based on the 2025 report, "An Analytical Framework of Executive Power: Categorizing the 2025 Executive Orders."
Use the arrows to navigate through the 14 warning signs.
Warning Sign 1
Powerful & Continuing Nationalism
What is it?
The constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, and rhetoric to promote a fervent and exclusionary national identity. This approach often positions the nation as inherently superior and its interests as paramount, superseding international cooperation or universal values.
What is Happening?
- An executive order directs the Attorney General to prioritize prosecuting flag desecration, describing the flag as a "sacred and cherished symbol." (Source)
- An executive order mandates classical architecture as the "preferred and default" style for federal buildings to "ennoble our Nation," while rejecting modern styles as "elite." (Source)
- An executive order designates English as the official language of the United States, revoking a prior order that improved access for non-English speakers. (Source)
Historical Comparison
While all U.S. presidents employ patriotic themes, the formal codification of "America First" as a directive for all federal agencies marks a significant departure from the post-World War II consensus favoring international alliances and cooperation. The focus on a singular language and a prescribed historical narrative echoes the "Americanization" movement of the early 20th century, which aimed to assimilate immigrants into a specific cultural mold. However, the current efforts are broader, targeting the entire educational system and seeking to define a national identity for all citizens, not just new arrivals.
International Context
Established democracies like the United Kingdom and Canada have national curricula but also emphasize multiculturalism and critical inquiry. The prescriptive nature of "patriotic education" and the singling out of "divisive concepts" aligns more closely with policies seen in countries like Hungary or Poland, where governments have actively sought to promote a nationalist historical narrative through the education system.
Warning Sign 2
Disdain for Human Rights
What is it?
Government actions that ignore, diminish, or violate established human rights norms and laws. This is often directed at marginalized or targeted groups and can manifest through weakening legal protections for refugees and asylum seekers, inhumane detention practices, and withdrawal from international human rights oversight bodies.
What is Happening?
- An executive order directs federal agencies to cease recognition of birthright citizenship for children of unlawfully present mothers, challenging the 14th Amendment. (Source)
- An executive order on grant criteria explicitly denies federal awards to "undocumented immigrant grant recipient[s], transgender grant recipient[s]" and others deemed to promote "anti-American values." (Source)
- An executive order ends affirmative action requirements for federal contractors, a policy historically rooted in remedying systemic discrimination. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The first Trump administration's "zero tolerance" policy in 2018, which led to widespread family separations, was a significant and controversial human rights issue. The 2025 actions, however, represent a more comprehensive and systematic shutdown of asylum and refugee pathways. The United States has historically been the world's largest refugee resettler; the current policies represent a stark reversal of this decades-long bipartisan tradition.
International Context
While many countries, including in the European Union and Canada, have safe third country agreements that limit where asylum can be claimed, the wholesale suspension of asylum processing at the border and the challenge to birthright citizenship are extreme measures among established democracies.
Warning Sign 3
Identification of Enemies as a Unifying Cause
What is it?
The manufacturing or exaggeration of threats from specific internal or external groups. These groups—often racial, ethnic, religious, or political minorities—are used as scapegoats to divert public attention from other problems, foster a sense of collective grievance, and unify a political base against a common foe.
What is Happening?
- An executive order identifies "radical indoctrination" in K-12 schools as an internal enemy that must be "ended" by the state. (Source)
- An executive order targets "Woke AI," defining an ideology as a dangerous contaminant in government technology to justify state control. (Source)
- Executive orders identify foreign governments (Russia, Brazil) as threats and impose punitive tariffs on other nations (India) for associating with them. (Source)
- An executive order institutionalizes a mechanism for punishing "rogue states" by designating them as a "State Sponsor of Wrongful Detention." (Source)
Historical Comparison
The use of an "enemy within" has precedents in American history, most notably during the Red Scares of the early and mid-20th century and the McCarthy era, which targeted alleged communists within the government. However, the direct, sustained, and personal application of this rhetoric by a sitting President against a broad swath of domestic political opponents, journalists, and civil servants represents a significant escalation of this tactic.
International Context
Authoritarian leaders frequently rely on the creation of internal and external enemies to consolidate power and justify repression. The scapegoating of minorities, political opposition, and the free press is a common feature in countries experiencing democratic backsliding. The language used by the administration aligns with patterns observed in such contexts.
Warning Sign 4
Obsession with National Security
What is it?
The government's pervasive use of national security as a justification for a wide range of actions, including the suspension of civil liberties, expansion of surveillance powers, and implementation of aggressive domestic and foreign policies. Fear is often used as a motivational tool to rally public support for these measures.
What is Happening?
- An executive order declares a "National Emergency" at the southern border, unlocking special powers to address what is framed as a security crisis. (Source)
- National security is invoked to justify delaying environmental regulations, reframing public health as a security issue to achieve deregulation. (Source)
- An executive order uses a broad definition of "national security work" to strip collective bargaining rights from federal employees in agencies like NASA and the National Weather Service. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The use of national security as a rationale for expanding executive power is not new. Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the George W. Bush administration enacted the PATRIOT Act, which significantly expanded surveillance powers. President Franklin D. Roosevelt invoked national security to justify the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. However, the current use of emergency declarations to address issues like energy policy and long-term immigration trends, rather than a specific, immediate crisis, represents an expansive interpretation of emergency powers.
International Context
Many democracies have robust national security and intelligence frameworks. However, in countries with stronger privacy protections, such as Germany, warrantless access to citizens' data is subject to much stricter legal constraints. The broad scope of surveillance authorized under FISA Section 702 remains a point of contention with European allies.
Warning Sign 5
Religion and Government Intertwined
What is it?
The fusion of religious and state authority, where the government promotes a specific religion or religious viewpoint, and religious figures are given prominent roles in shaping public policy. This often involves using religious rhetoric to justify political actions and providing preferential treatment to favored religious groups.
What is Happening?
- An executive order to combat antisemitism involves the government directly in defining and protecting a specific religious identity. (Source)
- An executive order prohibits "debanking" on the basis of religious beliefs, with the SBA Administrator explicitly citing "Christian, pro-life... organizations" as a protected class requiring government intervention. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The U.S. has a long history of civil religion, with presidents frequently invoking God and faith in public addresses. Faith-based initiatives were formalized under President George W. Bush and continued under President Obama. However, the current administration's focus on "eradicating anti-Christian bias," the appointment of figures from a specific theological tradition to lead faith outreach, and the promotion of specific religious displays in public schools represent a more pronounced intertwining of a particular religious viewpoint with government policy.
International Context
The principle of separation of church and state is a hallmark of many Western democracies, such as France. In contrast, countries like Hungary and Poland have seen their governments actively promote a specific Christian identity as central to their national character, a pattern that aligns with the trends observed in the U.S.
Warning Sign 6
Supremacy of the Military
What is it?
An elevation of the military's role, funding, and cultural status to a position of supreme importance. Military solutions are often favored over diplomatic ones, and the armed forces are used for domestic purposes in ways that can be ceremonial, political, or intimidating.
What is Happening?
- An executive order authorizes the Department of Defense to use the secondary title "Department of War," reframing its purpose from defensive to offensive and prioritizing "maximum lethality" over "tepid legality." (Source)
- An executive order directs the Secretary of Defense to create a standing National Guard quick reaction force for "rapid nationwide deployment" to "quell civil disturbances," directly involving the military in domestic law enforcement. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The United States has a history of large military parades, but they have almost exclusively been held to mark the end of a major conflict, such as the Grand Review of the Armies after the Civil War or the National Victory Celebration after the Gulf War. A parade of the scale planned for 2025, not tied to a specific military victory, is highly unusual in the American context and is more reminiscent of annual displays of military might in countries like Russia or North Korea. The Posse Comitatus Act has historically placed strict limits on the use of the military for domestic law enforcement, making the sustained deployment on the southern border a notable expansion of its domestic role.
International Context
In most established G7 democracies, military spending as a percentage of GDP is significantly lower than in the U.S. For example, in 2024, Germany's spending was 1.9%, France's was 2.1%, the UK's was 2.3%, and Canada's was 1.3%. The U.S. figure of 3.4% is substantially higher, reflecting a greater prioritization of military expenditure.
Warning Sign 7
Rampant Sexism
What is it?
Government policies, legal frameworks, and official rhetoric that reinforce traditional, patriarchal gender roles. It typically involves the restriction of rights for women and LGBTQ+ individuals, particularly in the areas of reproductive health, legal recognition, and protection from discrimination.
What is Happening?
- An executive order terminates affirmative action requirements for federal contractors, removing a key mechanism for addressing systemic barriers to employment for women. (Source)
- An executive order on grant criteria explicitly states that federal awards will not be designated for any "transgender grant recipient," a punitive policy directed at a gender minority group. (Source)
- An executive order titled "Saving College Sports" suggests a direct intervention in athletics, a domain with prominent debates over the participation of transgender athletes. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The political and legal conflict over reproductive rights has been a central feature of American life for over 50 years. However, the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization triggered an unprecedented wave of state-level bans that had previously been unconstitutional. The federal government's focus on defining sex in strictly binary terms and targeting transgender rights through executive orders and agency rules is a recent and sharp escalation in the "culture wars."
International Context
Many established democracies have moved to expand LGBTQ+ rights and protect reproductive freedom. The U.S. is an outlier among its peers in the scale and intensity of recent legislative and executive actions aimed at restricting these rights. The federal policies align more closely with those of socially conservative governments in nations like Poland or Hungary than with G7 partners.
Warning Sign 8
Corporate Power Protected
What is it?
This sign is evident when the government prioritizes the interests of large corporations over those of workers, consumers, and the public good. This is typically achieved through extensive deregulation, corporate tax cuts, and the appointment of industry insiders to regulatory agencies.
What is Happening?
- A "10-to-1" deregulation initiative was announced, requiring the elimination of ten existing regulations for every new one created, systematically reducing the regulatory burden on businesses. (Source)
- An executive order revoked a "whole-of-government" effort to promote economic competition, actively dismantling a framework designed to challenge corporate consolidation. (Source)
- An executive order directs federal agencies to "eliminate or expedite" environmental reviews for commercial space companies, providing sector-specific deregulation. (Source)
- An executive order requires federal agencies to incorporate a "sunset rule" into their regulations, causing them to expire automatically unless actively renewed. (Source)
Historical Comparison
Deregulation has been a goal of many Republican administrations, notably under President Ronald Reagan. However, the "10-for-1" repeal mandate in EO 14192 and the use of the "good cause" exception to bypass public comment represent a more aggressive and less transparent approach. The direct challenge to the independence of regulatory bodies by firing commissioners is a significant departure from established norms designed to insulate these agencies from political interference.
International Context
In many European democracies, corporate power is balanced by strong labor unions and robust regulatory frameworks governing consumer protection, environmental standards, and worker rights. The U.S. approach of deep deregulation and challenges to agency independence is an outlier among developed economies.
Warning Sign 9
Controlled Mass Media
What is it?
This sign involves efforts by the government to control, intimidate, or delegitimize the press. This can range from direct censorship and control of state media to indirect methods such as revoking press credentials, filing lawsuits against news organizations, delegitimizing critical reporting as "fake news," and creating a media environment favorable to the ruling party.
What is Happening?
- A series of executive orders have repeatedly delayed enforcement of a Congressionally-mandated ban on the social media platform TikTok. (Source)
- The orders direct the Department of Justice not to take any action to enforce the Act and to issue letters to service providers stating there has been "no violation of the statute" during the delay. (Source)
Historical Comparison
Tensions between the White House and the press are a long-standing feature of American politics. The Nixon administration, for example, was famously hostile toward journalists. However, the combination of revoking credentials, imposing prior restraint-style pledges on Pentagon reporters, and the personal filing of multi-billion dollar lawsuits by a sitting president against major news organizations represents a more direct and multifaceted campaign against the institution of the free press.
International Context
In many authoritarian states, the first steps toward consolidating power involve controlling the media, either through state ownership or by intimidating, suing, or jailing critical journalists. The tactics employed by the administration, while not yet amounting to state control of the media, are consistent with the early stages of such efforts seen in countries like Hungary, Turkey, and Russia.
Warning Sign 10
Labor Power Suppressed
What is it?
This sign is marked by government actions that weaken the power of labor unions and erode protections for workers. This can include appointing anti-union officials, promoting "right-to-work" laws, restricting the right to strike, and siding with corporations in labor disputes.
What is Happening?
- An executive order established an Emergency Board to investigate a railroad labor dispute, triggering a 120-day "cooling-off" period that effectively delays a potential strike by the unions. (Source)
- An executive order excludes federal employees in agencies like NASA and the Department of Commerce from collective bargaining rights under a broad "national security" justification, potentially affecting over a million workers. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The power of labor unions has been a point of political contention for over a century. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 significantly curtailed union power, and President Ronald Reagan's firing of striking air traffic controllers in 1981 is seen as a major turning point in modern labor relations. The current strategy of incapacitating the NLRB by denying it a quorum is a more procedural, but equally effective, method of suppressing labor power.
International Context
Compared to most developed nations, especially in Europe, the United States has weaker legal protections for union organizing and collective bargaining. The percentage of the workforce that is unionized is significantly lower in the U.S. than in countries like Germany, Sweden, or Canada. The current actions further widen this gap.
Warning Sign 11
Disdain for Intellectuals & Arts
What is it?
This sign is characterized by hostility towards academia, the arts, and science. It often involves cutting funding for the arts and humanities, censoring educational curricula, and promoting anti-intellectual rhetoric that dismisses expertise and critical inquiry in favor of ideology and emotion.
What is Happening?
- An executive order criticizes the "architectural elite" and mandates a "preferred and default" classical style for federal buildings, rejecting modern artistic expertise. (Source)
- An executive order targets cultural and academic institutions like the "Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars" and the "Institute of Museum and Library Services" for elimination. (Source)
- Executive orders aim to close the Department of Education and prevent federal funds from supporting concepts like "diversity, equity, and inclusion," framing educators as ideological enemies. (Source)
Historical Comparison
Periods of anti-intellectualism have occurred in U.S. history, such as the Scopes Trial in the 1920s over the teaching of evolution. However, the current wave of state-level legislative "gag orders" on teaching specific historical and social topics is unprecedented in its scale and scope. The direct replacement of the board of a major national cultural institution like the Kennedy Center for political reasons is also without modern precedent.
International Context
In countries experiencing democratic decline, universities and cultural institutions are often among the first targets. Governments in Hungary and Turkey have taken control of universities, purged academics, and redirected arts funding to support politically favored narratives. The actions in the U.S. show parallels to these international trends.
Warning Sign 12
Obsession with Crime & Punishment
What is it?
A disproportionate focus on crime and the use of punitive measures as the primary solution to social problems. It often involves calls for expanding the death penalty, enacting mandatory minimum sentences, and increasing the power and immunity of law enforcement, while downplaying or ignoring issues of police misconduct or systemic inequities.
What is Happening?
- An executive order declares a "state of emergency" in Washington, D.C., citing rising crime to justify extraordinary federal intervention in a local jurisdiction. (Source)
- The "emergency" is operationalized by hiring more federal police and establishing a dedicated D.C. National Guard unit for public safety. (Source)
- An executive order uses the coercive power of the federal budget to pressure states into adopting cash bail by threatening to suspend funding to jurisdictions with cashless bail policies. (Source)
- An executive order explicitly targets Washington, D.C.'s cashless bail system by directing federal law enforcement to seek federal custody of offenders whenever possible, bypassing local policy. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The "tough on crime" era of the 1980s and 1990s saw the widespread adoption of mandatory minimum sentences and an expansion of the death penalty. The current federal push, particularly the directive to the Attorney General to encourage state-level capital prosecutions and the focus on specific groups like undocumented immigrants, represents a revival and intensification of these policies after a period of bipartisan criminal justice reform efforts.
International Context
The United States is the only Western democracy that still uses the death penalty. The administration's push to expand its use and resume federal executions places the U.S. further out of step with its international peers.
Warning Sign 13
Rampant Cronyism & Corruption
What is it?
This sign is characterized by the ruling regime appointing friends, family, and political allies to government positions, regardless of their qualifications. It also involves using the power of the state to benefit these allies, protect them from accountability, and engage in practices like awarding no-bid contracts or using presidential pardons for political purposes.
What is Happening?
- An executive order establishes a "Gold Card" visa program, allowing a foreign national to gain entry into the U.S. by making a "$1 million" financial gift to a fund controlled by the Secretary of Commerce. (Source)
- This program creates a direct, legal pathway for wealthy individuals and corporations to effectively purchase immigration status through a large financial contribution to a specific government department. (Source)
Historical Comparison
The use of the pardon power has been controversial under many presidents. President Bill Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich and President George H.W. Bush's pardons of Iran-Contra figures were widely criticized. However, the mass pardon of individuals convicted for a direct assault on the democratic process is unprecedented. The appointment of individuals to key oversight roles based on their support for debunked political theories is also a departure from norms of merit-based appointments.
International Context
In many countries with high levels of corruption, the ruling party uses state resources, contracts, and appointments to reward political loyalty and punish opponents. The patterns observed—pardoning allies, appointing loyalists to oversight roles, and using state power against opponents' business interests—are hallmarks of such systems.
Warning Sign 14
Fraudulent Elections
What is it?
This sign involves efforts by the ruling party to manipulate the electoral process to its advantage. This can include spreading disinformation about election integrity, enacting laws that restrict voting access for disfavored groups, purging voter rolls, closing polling places in opposition areas, and using the power of the state to challenge or overturn election results.
What is Happening?
- A comprehensive review of executive orders issued since January 2025 reveals no actions that directly pertain to the administration of elections, the modification of voter eligibility rules, or the procedures for counting ballots.
- The Election Truth Alliance (ETA) has conducted an independent analysis of the 2024 presidential election results in Pennsylvania, indicating "patterns consistent with vote manipulation" in Election Day data, and has formally requested a hand audit of paper ballot records. (Source)
Historical Comparison
Voter suppression has a long history in the United States, particularly during the Jim Crow era. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was enacted to counter these practices. The current wave of restrictive laws, enacted after the Supreme Court weakened the VRA, represents the most significant effort to roll back voting access in decades. The sustained campaign by a former and current president to delegitimize election results is without precedent in modern American history.
International Context
In countries experiencing democratic erosion, manipulating election laws is a key strategy for incumbents to maintain power. This includes changing voter ID requirements, altering rules for mail-in voting, and creating obstacles for voter registration, all of which are trends currently observed in several U.S. states.