Our contemporary discourse regarding the condition, or should I say demise, of our American democracy is confusing, if not utterly opaque. Some feel that we are in the midst of an actual coup, or at least a slow-motion insurrection, though they cannot assess its ultimate prospects with much confidence. Others are a bit more sanguine. While acknowledging the threats posed by Trump’s rhetoric and bluster, they would argue that our institutions are sufficiently resilient to withstand attack. After all, our system has done so in the past.

Still, an increasing number of commentators are sounding decidedly pessimistic. They fear that the overall response to an impending authoritarian takeover has been insufficient in proportion to the threat. In their view, the theoretical line in the sand may already been crossed. If not yet passed, then we are poised on a tipping point at this very moment … that point where the die surely will have been cast and our fate sealed.

If our democratic traditions were threatened by an external source, as happened when Adolf Hitler bizarrely declared war on the U.S. on December 11, 1941, we might well imagine a more substantive evaluation of the situation and a more incontrovertible response. After all, the country responded in a unified manner back in 1941. The deep divisions that had existed about getting involved in a 2nd European conflict literally disappeared overnight. Our response to that threat energized a whole nation. Even movie stars and athletes joined the fight. Ted Williams, my boyhood hero and the last major league ballplayer to hit .400 for a full season, lost about five years of his ball career as a fighter pilot in WWII and in Korea. Talk about sacrifice.

Today’s threat to American democracy is in slow motion. There has not been an explosive sneak attack on a major military base (e.g., Pearl Harbor). No, it is taking place in drips and drabs, where those who wish to replace democratic principles with authoritarian rule keep pushing the political envelope by inches toward ultimate victory. It is the toad in the pan of water phenomenon … throw the reptile into boiling water and it likely will just jump out. Place it in tepid water and slowly raise the heat, however, and they might perish before catching on to their fate.

Is the water boiling yet? Just in the last few days, a United States Senator was handcuffed and thrown to the ground for attending a public hearing by a member of Trump’s cabinet. The administration has federalized some national guard troops and threatened to jail the Democratic Governor of our largest state over exaggerated fears regarding largely peaceful protests of MAGA deportation policies. Trump, or his minions, continue to threaten, attack, or financially penalize those who do not fall in line. My home town, Madison WI, is on the administration’s hit list for being insufficiently compliant with Trump’s more heinous policies. With each day, the echoes of 1933 Germany and the rise of Nazi authoritarianism are beating louder and louder.

Of course, this existential threat to our core governing principles did not occur overnight. As many have pointed out, including myself on many occasions, the blueprint was laid out in the early 1970s by Lewis Powell, a conservative corporate attorney who would soon be appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Richard Nixon. Oddly enough, when the Watergate scandal broke in short order, members of both parties agreed that the Constitution needed to be protected. Nixon was forced to resign. Back then, our institutions held in face of an existential crisis.

Powell started the ball rolling in a different direction. He argued that reinstituting conservative rule after several decades of a dominant New Deal approach to governance required that those on the right strive to take control of the key institutional levers essential to governing at the national level. These include the media, the judiciary, educational systems, the means of social control (police and military), control of local election protocols (e g., gerrymandering), among numerous others.

Over the next several decades, the forces of the right made slow and (more or less) steady progress toward their goals. Looking back, the elimination of the Fair Standards rules (not requiring balanced political coverage) by Reagan was a huge step to the right. The Citizens United ruling was another large retreat from democratic rule and full political participation by all. Yet, new technologies also played a significant role. The balkanization of our sources of information has been critical. No more Walter Cronkites. Now, everyone can select their boutique information venues so that their normative bubbles are not disturbed.

Still, the center essentially held until about a decade ago. Mitt Romney was the last centrist Republican candidate for President before the party finally imploded and was purged of moderates. In a way, the emergence of Trumpism marked the beginning of the ultimate assault on democratic rule based approaches that are premised on formal constitutional principles and the rule of law. With his reelection began the final push toward authoritarian rule.

In hindsight, Trump didn’t really expect to win in his first try. Thus, he wasn’t quite prepared for this ultimate push. Four years out of office, however, gave the hard- right time to prepare for a second go at it. This time around, there would be no mistake. Thus, we watched in horror as the development of the 2025 Plan and agenda emerged. In their second opportunity, the hard right would hit the ground running.

I’ve never forgotten the speech Trump gave to a group of evangelicals during the election. Vote for me one last time and you won’t have to worry about voting again. What most dismissed as pompous bragging or dismissable conjecture, I took more as a dire prophesy. I’m not right often but I fear I was on this occasion.

The assault on democracy began on day one. Among many other things, we’ve seen the decimation of federal agencies and civil service protections, a purge of military leadership, attacks on those elements of the media and judiciary (including private law firms) not under their control, frontal attacks on the research community and our preeminent university system, the weaponization of federal agencies to pusue personal vendettas, and the attempted intimidation of local and state officials who remain loyal to their consciousnesses and their  constituents. This list could go on and on.

The response to all this? Perhaps we will have an answer to this question on Saturday, June 14. Trump will have an old style military parade fit for a megolomaniacal strongman while those concerned about the fate of democracy are expected to take to the streets across the country. In the meantime I sense many folk still focus on how their favorite sports team is doing as opposed to considering the fate of our democratic experiment. It is worse than Nero fiddling while Rome burned. Most average folk seem remarkably oblivious to the flames rising about them.

Despite my cynicism, there are some numbers to look at, though they evidence considerable variation and thus uncertainty respecting their significance. On a disturbing note, there has been a recent report that about 48 percent of survey respondents said the country was going in the right direction. It would seem that this level of positivity has not been seen in over two decades. Which country can they possibly be talking about? Then again, I’ve seen many similar polls tapping overall feelings about, for example, the state of the economy. Often, the results show a majority believe things are getting worse even as the empirical numbers are trending positive. It would appear that emotional responses do not necessarily follow hard evidence.

More detailed (less global) survey responses tell a different story. The most recent results on the administration’s performance are largely negative. Only 38 percent approve of Trump’s performance overall (a drop of 8 percentage points since his inauguration) with 54 percent disapproving. The approval rates for his key cabinet members also hover between 37 and 38 percent.

Approval ratings of his salient policy initiatives are not much better. With the exception of Trump’s management of border control (slightly more than half approve) the other numbers are negative. Approval of his policies on immigration, deportation, and the overall economy fall between 40 and 43 percent. Trump’s policies on trade, the universities, and various foreign policy questions garner even lower scores, with approval rates lying somewhere between 34 and 38 percent. Bringing up the rear is approval of Trump’s Big, Beautiful Budget Bill at 27 percent.

Apparently, even a dull American electorate see that his budgetary legislation is a transparent attempt at thievery by the Uber wealthy. Remarkably, only 10 percent favor cutting Medicaid merely to finance another tax cut for those who already have more than enough.

Internationally, Trump doesn’t fare much better. A recent Pew Survey of political attitudes across 24 countries suggest widespread opposition to the Trump regime. Some 19 of the 24 countries surveyed showed a negative response to Donald’s rule. When asked how confident they were that Trump would generally do the right thing, some 62 percent of all respondents said NO. That included 91 percent of Mexican respondents, 81 percent of the French and 71 percent from our good neighbors to the north. On the other hand, Nigerians loved the Donald. Go figure.

What do these generally negative suggest? First, it is foolhardy to assign significant meaning to specific poll numbers. They fluctuate wildly at times. However, I am once again struck by the stubborn support demonstrated by the MAGA faithful. After all, Biden saw his support fall into the 20s even before his obvious mental decline and during a time when his performance in kickstarting the post-covid economy bordered on the remarkable. Again, there seems to be little correspondence between perception and reality.

Trump, on the other hand, appears to have this rock solid level of support. He was right when he once noted that he could shoot someone in broad daylight on fifth avenue and his people would still love him. This base looks to him with cult-like adoration. Then again, he has the same core message that was successful for the German Fuhrer … the appeal of Aryan supremacy or, in today’s context, the superiority of white, nativist hegemony. That appeal to extreme tribalism has always had long legs, hate (and sex) have always sold well. Many will sacrifice much merely to look down on someone else.

I never tire of pointing out that Trump’s core support, somewhere in the mid to upper 30ish range, is remarkably close to what Hitler achieved in Germany’s last free elections. And yet, he must be worried. Even elements of his core support are wavering. In rural Wisconsin, for example, an increasing number of farmers who saw him as their savior now face financial ruin because of his trade and deportation policies. Even these cult like supporters might be tempted to jump ship if pushed far enough. Ultimately abandoning him will take a lot.

But here is what worries me. Let’s say that these negative sentiments persist, even deepen (if that is possible). How will the hard right respond? They have come a long way since publication of the Powell strategy document in the 70s, further still since Goldwater’s thrashing in the 1964 Presidential election. They are now so close to absolute power they can taste it. Would they really risk it all in the 2026 mid-terms or the 2028 national election? My guess is not bloody likely.

They know the classic playbook. It is not rocket science. Drum up a false crisis, declare an emergency, isolated and destroy your opposition, and send in the troops. Los Angeles might well be practice session or the start of a real coup. Time will tell. But whenever that time comes, two elements of the drama will be critical. First, will enough Americans respond in opposition, as they did in the early 1940s? Or, on the other hand, will most acquiesce to dictatorial control. Second, will the institutional forces of social control (military, quasi-military, and police) abide by their oaths or will they facilitate the final demise of our democratic experiment. The performance of ICE (wearing masks as they sweep adults and children from your homes, schools, and places of employment) does little to give me hope in that regard. 

I used to laugh, well snicker, at people offering doomsday prophecies. We’ve seen everything before and survived, I would say.   I no longer dismiss such dark projections about our future. Nope, I no longer do. My one blessing is that I likely won’t last long if the worst comes to pass. But that is a small and tenuous blessing indeed.