The United States has long upheld an international reputation as the sword and shield of democracy, championing liberal ideals and warning other nations against the rise of authoritarianism. To such an extent, the U.S. has arguably played the role of a democratic watchdog for decades– analyzing other regimes to spot signs of autocracy and using its global leverage to sanction, guide, or correct those who fell short, engaging in nearly 400 foreign military interventions between 1776 and 2023 (see: “Operation Uphold Democracy”).
Now, the call is coming from inside the house.
On October 16th, 2025, a network of 300+ national and homeland security experts, composed of former F.B.I. directors, C.I.A. executives, and Ambassadors, released a first-of-its-kind report titled Accelerating Authoritarian Dynamics: Assessment of Democratic Decline. This publicly-accessible exposé discusses recent initiatives taken by the Trump administration to expand executive power as signs of rapid democratic backsliding in the United States. On release, the group named The Steady State claimed that they had used the same tools once used to assess foreign risks to show “unmistakable warning signs” of democratic erosion at home.
Scholars of democratic backsliding have long warned that dismantling of democracy will not come in the form of violent coups or governmental take-overs. Instead, it will unfold gradually through what Nancy Bermeo calls “executive aggrandizement”: slow, legalistic concentration of power within the executive branch, operationalized through the erosion of institutional checks, the politicization of the judiciary, and restrictions on press freedom; all justified under the rhetoric of reform or national security. Throughout a synthesis of the literature on democratic erosion, there is an assumption that the public shall largely be ignorant (or at worst, complicit) in a gradual and subtle dismantling of democratic institutions. However, in the case of the United States and abroad, the assumption of an unknowing public is shifting.
In Europe, the group Civil Liberties Union for Europe identified five countries as “dismantlers” of democracy, driving a continental democratic recession. One such example was Italy, where the organization criticized Giorgia Meloni’s government for measures threatening judicial independence and media freedom. The United States appears to be following a similar trajectory of awareness. Organizations such as The Steady State have begun reframing what once might have been quiet institutional drift as an explicit democratic emergency, and attempting to reach as many people as possible with their arguments. These organizations are deliberately positioning their exposure of anti-democratic action onto platforms that are consumable and accessible to the general public, through social media, online news, and public forums. So much so, Accelerating Authoritarian Dynamics: Assessment of Democratic Decline includes a conclusory “Reader’s Guide” explaining the format of the report for those unfamiliar with U.S. intelligence documents, offers a series of outside sources for ordinary readers, and even some SparkNotes-style key points.
These events, among many others, raise several questions for scholars of democratic erosion: If awareness of backsliding no longer belongs exclusively to scholars and elites but becomes a shared public consciousness, how does that reshape the trajectory of democratic decline? Does visibility mitigate erosion or just make it more polarized, contested, and performative? Perhaps the most critical and most unsettling question is: does it matter?
The weekend following the release of The Steady State’s piece, the United States observed the second in a series of “No Kings” protests nationwide, which centered around the public’s disdain towards what they believe are Trump’s attempts to act more as a monarch than an elected official. In response, President Trump posted an A.I.-generated video of himself wearing a golden crown in a “King Trump” jet soaring over protestors. This back-and-forth dynamic, especially when taken into consideration with Trump’s previous unsuccessful impeachment, raises a deeper question about the limits of civic awareness in an age of political irony. If protest and exposure can be so easily parodied, does public mobilization truly have the corrective power that so many scholars have attributed to it?
Taken together, the exposé, the protests, and the reaction to them expose a new paradox and gap in the study of democratic decline: awareness might not guarantee accountability. While the study of democratic backsliding is relatively young, the reality is that even regimes that once stood as champions of democracy across the world are now facing a crisis of credibility, and the people’s eyes are opening to democratic erosion. These developments call for the research to move beyond documenting the fact of backsliding to examining the experience of it: what citizens see, how they react to it, and what it means when they do.
From Washington to Rome, the alarm has been pulled. The question is no longer who sees democracy fading– it’s who’s still pretending not to.
References:
Bermeo, N. (2016). On democratic backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0012
Gambino, L. (2025, October 16). US “on a trajectory” toward authoritarian rule, ex-officials warn. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/16/trump-authoritarianism-warning
Rankin, J. (2025, March 17). Italy one of five “dismantlers” causing “Democratic recession” in Europe, report says. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/17/italy-one-of-five-dismantlers-causing-democratic-recession-in-europe-report-says?
Riess, R., Elassar, A., & Powell, T. B. (2025, October 18). Millions expected to rally against Trump administration at “no kings” protests across the country. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/no-kings-protests-trump-news-10-18-25
Rissman, K., & Marcus, J. (2025, October 20). Trump trolls “no kings” protests with obscene AI video: Live updates. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/no-kings-protest-trump-today-live-updates-b2847817.html
The Steady State. (2025, October 16). Accelerating authoritarian dynamics: Assessment of Democratic Decline. The Steady State. https://steadystate1.substack.com/p/accelerating-authoritarian-dynamics
O
This post insightfully reframes democratic erosion as not merely an elite-driven process but a public experience shaped by awareness and media visibility. By contrasting “executive aggrandizement” in the U.S. and Italy with growing civic consciousness, there is an important paradox: can transparency coexist with accountability in an era of performative politics? Her observation that awareness might amplify polarization rather than resistance resonates with Levitsky and Ziblatt’s warning about “norm erosion” and McCoy et al.’s discussion of affective polarization. We still don’t know whether this public engagement transforms citizens into democratic defenders or accelerates the spectacle of decline.
Experts are feeling mounting unease with the status of democratic checks on institutions around the globe. In fact, for the seventh consecutive year the rule of law has decreased, according to the WJP Rule of Law Index. And you are correct: such is the case in the U.S., which this new world trend is seemingly inspiring.
In particular, there is significant norm erosion, especially regarding executive behavior. In How Democracies Die, Levitsky and Ziblatt recognize norms as guardrails of democracy, and they are typically not visible when working but extremely obvious when they are not. Such is the case with the U.S.: as you highlighted, the world has long regarded the U.S. as the global watchdog for democracy. Previous leaders were leveled and there was respect (for the most part) for the opposing party (what Levitsky and Ziblatt describe as mutual toleration).
In the contemporary U.S., however, politicians and the public alike have eroded the norm of mutual toleration. Norms are particularly dependent on leadership and the political actor’s choices. Trump’s attacks on the most recent No Kings Protest with the release of the infamous AI video dramatically attacks the norm of mutual toleration.
Nonetheless, I would not classify such efforts as futile. Protest has long been regarded as a powerful tradition and fundamental right, and most importantly an indicator of a healthy democracy. Understandably, criticism from public officials, especially from the President, may seem disheartening. However, several historical protests with significant legal change had government dissenters (such as the Civil Rights Movement, Gay Liberation Movement, Feminist Movement), and such movements furthered democracy levels in the U.S..
No Kings Protests and their familiars play a pivotal role in the U.S. democracy: calling out the actions of the President and creating awareness for the pressing issues at hand. Despite several attacks from Trump and his loyalists on dissenters, protests remain an important component of democracy, and have the potential to address and call out the norm erosion taking place.