What’s in it for me? Get a big-picture perspective on America’s current political landscape.
American democracy is in a precarious state. A lot has to do with the effect Donald Trump has had on US politics and the effort he’s put forth to undermine the veracity of the election process. But the looming threat of authoritarianism isn’t new. It has, in fact, been brewing for a long, long time. Throughout the twentieth century alone, American politics has been home to fascist ideas, and elected officials have used undemocratic language to manipulate disillusioned voters.
In this Blink, we’ll look at this history in three ways. In the first section, we’ll move through the twentieth century to see how the threat to democracy has grown. In the second, we’ll see how the threat intensified before and after the 2016 election. And in the final section, we’ll look back to the nation’s earliest days. While America has struggled with the contradictions of its past, between the democratic aspirations for equality and the realities of a racial hierarchy, history may show us a way forward after all.
A growing threat in America
“Conservative” and “liberal.” You’ve no doubt heard these two words a lot over the years. The fight over American values, including democracy, is usually boiled down to being a fight over conservative ideals and liberal ideals. But these terms get used so often that it’s easy to forget where they come from.
The origins of American conservatism date back to the 1930s, when a coalition between Republicans and certain factions of the Democratic Party formed in opposition to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. This unlikely alliance included southern Democrats, disapproving of the New Deal's lack of overt segregationist programs, and westerners who opposed federal intervention in land and water protection.
The term “conservative” was used strategically to convey opposition to the ways in which the New Deal supposedly represented government overreach – or the ways in which the federal laws violated traditional American values of states’ rights. It wasn't an accurate representation of true conservatism but rather, a convenient word for a political position.
It’s also important to note that, in the years surrounding World War I, democracy wasn’t the favorite ideology for every US politician. Among other popular ideas was fascism, which was being presented by the Italian leader Benito Mussolini as a viable alternative to socialism. Fascism is a hierarchical system that rejects the equality that is inherent in democracy. Fascists believe that some people are inherently better than others, so the control of the nation should be placed in the hands of a select few.
Fascist ideology gained traction in the early twentieth century, influencing leaders like Adolf Hitler in Germany. The idea of a hierarchical social system also gained popularity among US politicians, including those in the Democratic coalition that held sway in the American South.
But fascism lost its popularity after the bombing of Pearl Harbor pushed the US into World War II. In the years following the war, what’s known as the “liberal consensus” had a firm hold on America. As nonwhite soldiers returned home from fighting abroad and ostensibly defending US democracy, it became more difficult for the country to maintain its segregationist policies. So during Harry Truman's time in office, there was the development of the President's Committee on Civil Rights and new legislation meant to promote equal rights, including Black voting rights.
This kind of legislation, as well as Supreme Court decisions like Brown v. Board of Education, represents the liberal consensus and its progress toward civil rights equality. With both Democrat and Republican presidents, it defined much of the 1950s and 1960s. But these dramatic changes, coming from the federal government, were seen as more overreaching attacks on conservative values. Opponents to the liberal consensus, such as Alabama governor George Wallace, were campaigning to revive an American history that was based upon a racial hierarchy.
With the help of writers and political theorists like William F. Buckley Jr., in the 1950s, the opposition to the liberal consensus solidified into Movement Conservatism. In the early 1960s, they associated Black rights with communism. And, during the rise of Richard Nixon to the seat of the US presidency, a shift in the political parties occurred. Using what is known as the “Southern strategy” Nixon, a Republican, sought support from disaffected Democrats by promising to halt federal intervention in desegregation. This strategy signaled a reversal of the parties' positions on race issues and set the stage for a new, more challenging period for American democracy.
An authoritarian streak began to emerge during the Nixon era. His campaign strategically polarized voters. He portrayed Democrats as “detractors of America” and appealed to the false history of America that goes all the way back to the post-Civil War Reconstruction era. But what is, perhaps, best remembered is the Watergate scandal and Nixon’s undemocratic efforts at interfering with the election process.
Still, the period between the 1940s and the 1970s is known as “the great compression,” so called because income levels across the board came closer together to create a thriving middle class. It began with Roosevelt’s New Deal and ended when an economic shift took place in the 1980s, during the presidency of Ronald Reagan. What followed is known as “the great divergence” as income levels began to trend away from one another, with a small percentage getting richer and other groups trailing downward, out of the middle class.
Reagan's rise also marked a shift in political rhetoric, blending Nixon's divisive strategy with a softer, more relatable image. Still, in the 1980s and ’90s, the general public had a resistance to the ideology of the Movement Conservatives. For this reason, those Conservatives went to work at weakening the mechanisms of democracy. New voter suppression legislation was passed and the Supreme Court gained more judges who upheld the false narrative of America being founded on the principles of states’ rights and maintaining racial hierarchies. All of these efforts paid off when the Supreme Court intervened to decide the winner of the 2000 election.
Things got even more divisive following the emergence of the Tea Party, following the Democrats’ success in winning the presidency with Barack Obama in 2009. The Tea Party was an opposition group focused on turning back the clock to a mythological time based on their interpretations of the Founding Fathers’ principles.
The gerrymandering efforts of the Republican party culminated in Operation REDMAP, which stands for Redistricting Majority Project. It was an effort to redraw district maps in a way that would ensure their control of legislature in key states such as Florida, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin. This project worked at taking power away from voters in the congressional elections and tipping the scales in their favor. The Republican majority leader, Mitch McConnell, employed a policy of obstructionism, vowing to try and block every one of President Obama’s policies – even refusing to consider Obama’s choice to fill a vacancy in the Supreme Court. All of which adds up to a severe erosion of faith in the democratic process.
In the next section, we’ll see where this erosion of faith turned into something like an overt experiment in authoritarianism.
A clear and present danger
On June 16, 2015, Donald Trump descended the golden escalator at Trump Tower to announce his presidential campaign. The previous year, the Republicans had secured control of the Senate and had honed their message to voters: that the Democrats were downright dangerous. All they needed was a convincing figurehead for that message. They got more than they were expecting with Trump.
Trump's message resonated with a base seeking a hierarchical world, where they could dominate based on race, gender, and religion. The events surrounding the 2016 election were surprising to both sides of the political divide, while events following Trump's election marked a significant departure in American history.
Despite not aligning with the majority of voters, Trump's agenda signaled a deliberate move to dismantle the active government, challenging the very principles on which the nation was built. The concept of “alternative facts” was introduced by Trump’s staff, revealing a deliberate strategy to dominate through misinformation, destabilizing the population.
Along with Russia's interference in the 2016 election, there was general concern about the broader implications of authoritarianism undermining American democracy through disinformation. The use of social media amplified the impact, driving wedges between citizens on crucial issues.
The danger of Trump's divisiveness can be seen in the events of August 11, 2017. His anti-immigrant, pro-hierarchal vision of America emboldened right-wing groups to take to the streets of Charlottesville, Virginia. Racists, neo-Nazis, white nationalists, and members of the KKK got together under the banner of “Unite the Right.” The event culminated in the death of counterprotester Heather Heyer, which underlines the consequences of Trump's rhetoric on societal dynamics.
But the bigger tool in the authoritarian toolbox is the effort in rewriting American history to suit your agenda. Over the years, Democrats and Republicans have both reframed history to suggest that something other than democratic equality was the desired goal. But Donald Trump’s presidency took it to another level. The State Department's Commission on Unalienable Rights brazenly manipulated history, presenting a vision of white Christian nationalism reminiscent of the pre-Civil War South.
Of course, one of the most vulnerable aspects of democracy is the election process, and in the days leading up to January 6th, Trump's attempts to delay the election and manipulate the electoral process were unprecedented. The “Stop the Steal” rally, marked by false narratives and a call for strength, set the stage for an attack on the Capitol. But this wasn’t a spontaneous event. The attack on democracy was the result of years of feeding false narratives rooted in white supremacy.
In true authoritarian fashion, Trump continued to perpetuate the “Big Lie” by falsely claiming election fraud. This lie became a rallying point for the Republican Party, leading to the purging of members who stand against it and the further erosion of the liberal consensus. Voting rights, civil rights, and the very fabric of American democracy continue to be picked at by a political group intent on regaining power at all costs.
In the final section, we’ll look at the real history of America to see how it truly differs from the distorted narrative that the Republican Party has been spinning for years.
A history that points to true democratic equality
What is America? It’s a fair question. There is, without a doubt, a paradoxical nature to the nation's founding principles. After all, the Founders, while championing equality, simultaneously owned enslaved people and considered certain groups as unequal. So how did it all start, and what direction was the country headed in leading up to the twentieth century?
Let’s begin in the days following the Seven Years' War, which ended in 1763. The war had left Britain bankrupt and King George III was eager to tax his subjects in the American colonies and continue to rule from afar with unpopular declarations that limited his subjects’ freedoms. For those British subjects, it chipped away at their sense of equality and led to a revolutionary shift. The Sons of Liberty emerged and became catalysts for political change, ultimately culminating in the Declaration of Independence.
But what kind of government would replace the rule of the British monarchy? First comes the Articles of Confederation, which is something that right-wing activists continue to point to as an important document. The Articles of Confederation did center power with the states, but it was also a disaster that quickly led to a crippling economic recession. Property losses were severe and the newly formed nation was about to tear itself apart unless it came up with something better.
That something was the US Constitution, which asserts the power of the federal government, which in turn derives its authority from the people. The biggest worry the Founders had was the kind of authoritarian rule that led to the revolution in the first place. So the document is filled with concerns and precautions taken to prevent government overreach. The addition of the Bill of Rights serves as a critical check on potential abuses of power.
Crucially, the US Constitution comes with the possibility of change – of adding amendments as the nation grows and new issues arise. From the beginning, the idea of American democracy isn’t set in stone. It’s a dynamic and ever-changing work in progress.
But what’s also there from the start is a contradiction. The Constitution states that all men are created equal, and yet many Founding Fathers were owners of enslaved people. This is a problem that threatened to destroy the nation. Many saw how this contradiction weakened the nation and weakened democracy, but slavery had made Southern leaders rich. So, by the 1850s, defenders of human enslavement, though a minority, wielded significant influence, rewriting history to suit their narrative of states' rights and white supremacy. Southern enslavers even seemed as though they were going to be able to ensure that the many new, western states would be slave states. Their twisted version of democracy, rooted in racial hierarchies, sparked debates and opposition, notably from rising politician Abraham Lincoln.
Lincoln saw how devastating it would be if the Western states became slave states, which was a fear that inspired him to run for president. During the Civil War that followed, as an elected president, he both abolished slavery and expanded federal government powers.
In an ideal version of history, Lincoln’s presidency and the end of the Civil War would perhaps have been enough to better ensure democracy’s future. But Lincoln was assassinated and challenges persisted during the Reconstruction era. Lincoln’s successor, President Johnson issued a controversial amnesty toward Southern leaders, and veterans of the Confederacy were treated as heroes. The mythological, alternate version of history was free to take root for future generations.
Yet, in the years that followed, the country was on a clear path to a more democratic future. The liberal consensus was forming. Women gained the right to vote. New perspectives emerged on education, labor, and the inclusion of marginalized voices. The Progressive Era, the New Deal; economic inequality was reducing, while civil rights were expanding.
This is the true history of America and it’s a history that can be reclaimed. In 1863, Abraham Lincoln warned people that many who claimed to be conservatives were, in fact, dangerous radicals who threatened democracy. He called on everyone to defend equality and reminded them that they had the right to consent to the government that claims to represent them. That is democracy, and if the people embraced these principles it could lead to, as Lincoln put it, “a new birth of freedom.”
Final summary
The journey of American democracy has been one of high tension. From the start, there’s been a conflict between inclusive ideals and historical realities. There’s been a persistent struggle to reconcile democratic principles with practices such as slavery, states' rights, and racial hierarchies. From the Civil War to the New Deal, key historical moments have shaped the evolution of American democracy. There have been many challenges and a few triumphs that have come to define the nation's path. But threats to democracy continue, many of which stem from the post-Reagan era when a radical minority succeeded in challenging democratic values and manipulating historical narratives. This also happened in the years leading up to the presidential election of Abraham Lincoln, who called for a renewed commitment to democratic ideals and the reclamation of the nation’s true history.