Donald Trump’s authoritarian drift in his second term places the country on a par with Hungary or Turkey, according to a ranking by Sweden’s V-Dem Institute
Democratic backsliding is advancing in the developed world. The annual report from Sweden’s V-Dem Institute leaves no room for doubt: almost a quarter of the world experienced democratic backsliding, or a shift towards autocratization, in 2025, and six of the 10 newly regressive countries identified in the research are located in Europe and North America, including G-7 powers such as Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
But the most unsettling conclusion reached by the Swedish institute is that the United States — once a proud beacon of the more or less free world — is no longer a liberal democracy and is now on a par with countries like Hungary or Turkey, thanks to President Donald Trump. Autocracy is also spreading throughout Europe, but its reach extends far beyond the Old Continent: 41% of the world’s population (3.4 billion people) now live in countries where democracy is eroding.
The institute, which belongs to the University of Gothenburg and uses 48 metrics in its evaluation, is one of the most reliable sources when it comes to rating the state of governments around the world, and the conclusion of its 2026 study confirms the worst fears about the authoritarian drift of the U.S. under Trump’s leadership.
He’s making moves like he’s expecting to be around another 50 years when he probably has 10 at the most. I’m way more afraid of who he might be paving the way for.
No way he has 10 years in him. Motherfucker is mentally gone as is. Weekend at Bernie’s.
All right, everybody needs pitchforks and torches. And we need four horses with four long ropes
Or, instead of the horses, and hear me out, we just need some green saplings maybe 20 feet tall and some rope in a sort of circle around a spot…
Us was always an electoral autocracy, you can vote an autocrat, it was never a democratic nation. Only a country which follow effective proportional representation system of democracy can be claimed as a democracy
No one will grow a ball and stop him, so it’s already too late. If you’re an American, your life will never be the same.
He’s on his way out. And despite the inevitability of the party fixing elections with the controlled opposition we have that these motherfuckers still trust somehow, in time, a true leader will emerge and lay waste to the oligarchy, it’s as certain as spring finally arriving.
It’s not a single person issue. The entire system is broken. Taking out one leader is not going to fix anything.
But will it make things better? Worse?
Who knows? On one hand Trump’s dementia means he’s acting erratically. On the other it means that it’s harder for the Nazis to follow whatever plan they have for the US. The next leader may stabilize things but the fall of democracy may be even faster.
I can remember when lots of the reactionary centrists and not a few on the left, oh, and of course, the right wing blow-hards, were playing Tone Police for everyone in 2016, and 2020 and again in 2024: lecturing us all about how uncivil it all was to be talking about fascism in relation to conservatives.
I wonder where all the WELLACKTUALLY guys are now.
A lot of the predictions and fears did not come true during Trump‘s first presidency.
Not for lack of trying on the administration’s part.
Because the fascists didn’t think they would win in 2016 and were unprepared.
In 2025 they had a plan
not a few on the left,
Nah, was a lot actually. I know a lot of people that were really upset after the election and after the first few months. Then it stopped being a problem. “You’re overreacting.” “Don’t think about it.” “We’ll be fine next election.”
We would have been if we could get rid of the controlled opposition. But you all still trust the establishment democrats somehow.
always has been
The pedofile class doesn’t want democracy
As far as I’m concerned, everyone who is a billionaire has to prove they had nothing to do with Epstein or pedophilia in general.
I feel like that’s reasonable but billionaires should automatically be abolished also
Let them try to get by on $999,999,999.99
If they pinch their pennies, show some restraint on…what was it? Avocado toast, Netflix subscriptions, smart phones, and big screen TVs, they just might get by on a mere penny less than one billion…
The cap should be 100 mil or less
If they had shown some restraint on all the houses that they made too damn expensive in the first place, the avocado toast meme wouldn’t have needed to exist
Nah, that’s still too much money. I know you’re being sarcastic but realistically it’d be way under 100 million.
I dream of a world where anything above 10 million net worth need to be reinvested or donated. Like, you can gift your kids until you and them and worth ten mil each, and their kids and whatnot, but it would limit wealth accumulation even with a hundred family members. Something like that anyway.
This seems reasonable
That’s more reasonable, they still have a lot of money but cannot just buy politicians left and right.
Worldwide, democracy has regressed to its lowest levels since the mid-1970s
I’ve been saying over and over again here, that it’s generally been going backwards since the 70’s. This goes for democracy, respect for human rights and minorities, and the peace movement.
And many people here simply don’t believe it. (I’m guessing younger ones)
It’s not just younger ones. I talk to a large group of boomers and they are all in the same boat of “everything is fine, we’ll just vote the next election. We’ve had presidents like this before.”
We’ve had presidents like this before.”
On that they are seriously mistaken, of course there have been bad presidents like Bush, but Trump is a whole new class of bad.
I hope they are right, and that all this can be solved by a simple election, but I’m not betting on it.
Let’s talk about what this really means, though. Why would that happen?
Could it be anything like:
- Because power is a fickle structure by nature and therefore democracy is an unstable system?
- Because technology advanced so fast that it yields control to whomever sits at its forefront?
- Because society chose not to make theoretical laws for technology that had yet been invented?
- Because (e.g., Russian) state propaganda was allowed to become so powerful that it actually destabilized global democracy?
- Because we were naïvely assuming we had a stable democracy, when in fact we never really did — it just hadn’t been under enough stress to show its flaws?
- Because institutional capitalism with monarch style governance is an economic system that necessarily leads to authoritarianism?
- Because the libertarian value tolerance of debate is an ill founded ideology, and we actually need more intolerance (e.g., limitations on free speech)?
- Because social media is not respected by the masses as the enormous medium of control that it wound up being in actuality?
- …
What’s the next big realization here for mankind?
Americans doing regime changes, mostly
I mean, sure. But shouldn’t something be said about what that means for democracy? Would it be:
“Democracy only works if you don’t try regime changes in foreign states, otherwise it starts to experience a phenomenon where the democracy withers”
…?
I’m doubtful it’s that simple. If it is, then democracy seems rather unstable in its current form. All it takes is one bad leader to trigger a chain reaction toward failure? Again, I’m doubtful.
There’s got to be a bigger story here.
The rich people are in an exclusive club and collude without meeting because what’s good for one is good for the other. They’ve also been a big driving force for change in the world from consumer based economic models to “supplier” based models. IE themselves.
When you put it that way, it sounds like democracy requires a global effort to continuously thwart such collusion, such wealth, maybe such exclusively? Something… It sounds righteous to me, but also like something that can become equally oppressive in perhaps many different ways.
What you describe is something that I understand to have been the case for most of human history, if not all of it. How do you resolve that issue? And, if that’s really the issue, what do you make of modern democracies?
Democracy grew out of too much power to the rich, though since day one they’ve been thwarting it where they can.
I honestly don’t have real answers for this, I just know of the problem.
We need a second hippie revolution. And I don’t mean the half-assed underground “comebacks” from the late 90s and 2010s, a real movement that actually influences policy.
Hippies were a CIA OP to distract the left from organising and doing drugs instead.
Lol, the hippies didn’t do shit.
Let’s be honest, the US was no shining beacon of democracy even before Trump. The system was rotten and everyone knew it. However, those with the power to change it have no incentive to do so. It was basically held up because the poeple in charge had some common decency. At that point it’s just a matter of time before someone came along that didn’t have this basic decency.
I think the people of the UK should take a long, hard look at how the situation has evolved in the US and decide if they want to change their system to avoid having only two parties dominate the political climate. Ironically, being a monarchy means they are probably more resistant to going down the same route, but I suspect the parties are going to get more radical as time goes on and the royals aren’t terribly popular these days.
(Opinion to be taken with a pinch of salt. I am no expert in these things and don’t live in either country; We’ve got our own radicalization and issues with our own democracy.)
the poeple in charge had some common decency.
The people in charge were scared of the public a little bit. It was not their decency that was stopping them, it was the danger of losing next elections if they took it too far. Bush attacked Iraq and he didn’t lie about the WMDs out of decency. He lied to cover his ass. Lindsey Graham was the same guy he is now back then. He didn’t lose his decency along the way. He realized he can be himself and people will still vote for him.
I left the US after the 2000 elections. Even then the writing was on the wall. Things only went into overdrive after Sept. 11th 2001. It’s never been the same country since.
Moving out of the country was, without a doubt, the best decision I made in my life.
the US was no shining beacon of democracy even before Trump
he didnt create that corrupt system, hes just taking advantage of it…
actually he and the other pedo billionaires did help to create the corrupt system who am I kidding?
WWII changed everything about the USA. Everywhere else in the world, manufacturing was bombed to oblivion, the populace unable to rebuild without a coordinated effort from governments and NGOs.
The US became a hub of manufacturing. We exported our culture, and our products, all over the world. Our currency and our language became the standard in business.
Everything since then has been a slow walk backwards, so that the ultrawealthy could exert more control and line their pockets. A return to the “real” American values of exploitation.
I think the people of the UK should take a long, hard look at how the situation has evolved in the US and decide if they want to change their system to avoid having only two parties dominate the political climate.
There are currently 5 parties vying for position here, but your point is still generally true. Hopefully with the rise of smaller parties, we might start to see a move towards a more proportional system, but I’m not holding my breath.
The Citizens get lazy under a Democracy, because they’re comfortable, but there are always those who want to everyone to do things their way, or else. Lazy Citizens let those people get their way too much, and it gets exploited, and the next thing you know, the Lazy Citizens have to do a lot more work to take control again, than if they had just been vigilant in the first place. It’s important to slap down the dipshits as soon as they get froggy.
many countrys and similar groups brake down solely due to corruption of the systems that got the country to where it was in the first place. many think about building the country but forget to set things in places to preserve the country their after. anti corruption laws need to be overbearing to deal with this upcreep imo.
They’re going to let him tear the country apart, and then 25th amendment his ass just after January 20th 2027. That lets Little Smokey take over, and he’s still eligible for 2 full terms. Mark my words…
Ah yes, President Couch Fucker
Yep, they will prop his rotting corpse up as long as they can, the plan is to having him be the wrecking ball, take all the blame, but by then the fixes are all in for the next one in line.
Not sure if they will foist vance on us, I don’t think they believe he can be the front of a cult but by they maybe the power will be consolidated enough that they don’t care since he’s just a puppet.
He’s an obese octogenarian. He’s already on borrowed time.
All the signs are there, he’s suffering acute heart failure likely. Just that he’s likely to get Dick Cheney’d a new heart they rip out of some teenager in China.
I think they’re just gonna kill him. Leaving him alive risks the chance of him sending whatever is left of MAGA after them. It also risks splitting their support base.
If they were going to do the smart thing and off him, they would have done so long ago.
Why would republicans have done that? It wasn’t in their interest to kill him while he still had enough sway and the populace still had some power. Now though, they know they can take over without risks since they’ve managed to accumulate so much power in the presidency that, so long as they can hold on to the senate, they can do whatever they want with the judicial having abandoned any semblance of control over the executive.
The sooner everyone recognizes this, the better
Here is a link to the report: https://www.v-dem.net/documents/75/V-Dem_Institute_Democracy_Report_2026_lowres.pdf
Here’s a press release from the source org about this:
… Okay no really, who ever in their right mind considered us a “liberal democracy”?
Swedens V-Dem Institute, apparently.
