Olga Lautman is a fearless defender of democracy. She keeps close tabs on authoritarian regimes and has had many reasons to should the alarm since the return of Trump. Now that Trump controls the executive branch, Congress, and usually the Supreme Court (where he occasionally loses when Barrett and Roberts dissent), he is on a path to tyranny.
She warns that his crackdown on dissent is a decisive step towards full-fledged authoritarianism. Let me add as a personal that not all forms of dissent are legal, even by the most liberal definition. As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, you can’t shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater. While I support student protests, there are reasonable limits defined by time, place, and manner. If students prevent others from learning by disrupting their classrooms or closing the library, that’s out of line, in my view. You are free to disagree. That’s your right, as it is mine.
Lautman writes:
Trump’s Crackdown: Silencing Dissent and Censoring the Press
While Trump floods the zone with chaos, I am watching a deeply disturbing pattern emerge. Recently, he has targeted universities under the guise of combating antisemitism, threatening to cut funding, open investigations, and deport foreign students involved in what he deems “illegal protests.” This move to silence student voices is part of a broader strategy—Trump is systematically laying the groundwork to criminalize dissent. Concurrently, he has continued to invoke emergency powers over immigration, granting himself sweeping authority with minimal oversight.
Adding to this concerning trend, Trump is weaponizing the Federal Communications Commission to suppress media freedom. Under his regime, the FCC has initiated investigations into major news organizations like NPR and PBS, scrutinizing their content and funding. The White House has also barred Associated Press reporters from covering presidential events, citing disagreements over “terminology.” Furthermore, the regime has taken control of the White House press pool, deciding which journalists can cover presidential activities, effectively beginning the process of sidelining independent media voices.
Today, the targets are “antisemitism” and “immigration.” Tomorrow, it could be any form of resistance to the regime. This pattern mirrors tactics employed by autocratic governments, where laws and regulations are manipulated to suppress opposition and control public discourse. It is imperative to recognize and challenge these encroachments on our democratic freedoms before dissent becomes a criminal act, and that is why I felt it was important to bring it to everyone’s attention.
The Playbook of Repression
Trump’s attacks on universities have nothing to do with stopping antisemitism. If they did, there would be a serious, balanced approach to addressing hate across the board. Instead, he’s selectively using it as a pretext to punish colleges, strip funding, launch investigations, and lay the groundwork for broader crackdowns on protests. These moves, along with the threat to deport foreign students who participate in protests, are a classic authoritarian tactic—silencing youth movements before they become a real threat.
In Russia, we have seen this exact strategy play out. Putin started by using the language of “public order” to justify suppressing protests. Then, he expanded it to clamp down on journalists, opposition figures, and universities. Today, any form of public dissent in Russia is met with immediate arrests, long prison sentences, or exile.
Trump is following the same playbook. First, redefine what qualifies as a legal protest. Then, frame all opposition as a national security threat. Finally, implement policies that criminalize resistance. Let’s not forget—during his first term, Trump wanted the military to shoot protesters, but guardrails stopped him. Now, with those guardrails gone and loyalists installed in key positions, he is laying the groundwork to justify an all-out assault on free speech and assembly, using the rhetoric of “law and order” to disguise repression as a “necessary” security measure.
The Danger of Emergency Powers
Trump’s continuing invocation of emergency powers on immigration is another red flag. Emergency powers are not inherently undemocratic, but in the wrong hands, they are a tool for consolidating unchecked authority. In Russia, Putin used emergencies—terrorist attacks, economic crises, and foreign threats—to justify expanding his power. Each crisis became an excuse to centralize control and dismantle any resistance to the regime.
Trump is testing the limits of emergency powers to override legal norms. He has already deployed the military on U.S. soil for immigration enforcement—what stops him from escalating further? With the Insurrection Act looming in the background, he is laying the groundwork to use military force against civilians under the pretense of a “national emergency.”
This is Just the Beginning
We are witnessing the early stages of a full-blown authoritarian shift. The selective targeting of student protesters, the abuse of emergency powers, and the push to redefine “illegal protests” are all interconnected. Today, it’s about silencing students. Tomorrow, it will be about crushing unions, blacklisting journalists, or jailing political opponents.
This is not alarmism—it’s a pattern seen time and again in authoritarian regimes. And it’s why we must sound the alarm now.
What Can We Do?
Expose and Document – Share information, track developments, and call out every attempt to silence dissent. Authoritarians thrive on people looking the other way.
Support Targeted Groups – Defend students, journalists, unions, and activists under attack. Legal funds, advocacy groups, and independent media need resources to fight back.
Pressure Lawmakers – Demand that Congress and state governments put up real resistance. Emergency powers must be challenged, and unconstitutional crackdowns must be met with legal action.
Mobilize and Protest – Peaceful mass protests and civil resistance are essential. Authoritarianism collapses when people refuse to comply.
Prepare for Escalation – The time to organize networks and alternative platforms is now and will be critical to keeping resistance alive.
The question is not whether Trump will attempt to consolidate power—it’s whether Americans will resist before it’s too late.

The majority of the people I know would discount this as alarmist. Maybe Trump needs to shake things up a bit. The world is in such a terrible shape because of the leftist Marxist Democrats. We need to get back to Christ.
You can’t make this up
LikeLiked by 1 person
Roy,
I suppose the same people would want the U.S. to be a theocracy, led by an evangelical. What happens to non-Christians in their theocracy?
LikeLike
The MAGA cult that wants the US to be a theocracy are the non-Christians. They practice hate with threats and violence.
Jesus Christ did not teach that.
LikeLike
How scary that what you wrote sounds exactly like the NOT good Germans who had no problem with Hitler “shaking things up” and their Jewish neighbors all being targeted for elimination.
The majority of the people you know who claim that intentionally harming those weaker is “getting back to Christ” are no different than the folks in Germany. We need to stop excusing their behavior and explain them the way we explain the Hitler-supporting Germans who weren’t bothered by their Jewish neighbors disappearing and being exterminated. We didn’t keep excusing Hitler supporters’ embrace of atrocities by fascist-splaining that Christianity and making Germany great required lots of harm to be done to other people.
We’ve allowed absurd lies to be treated like “truth” because people with privilege (for example, white Christians) get to say that their motives in condoning atrocities done to other people are good. But their motives are NOT good. Because the reality is that they could easily be good Christians without condoning the atrocities, but they WANT the version of Christianity that makes them feel good about themselves, and they embrace the version that lets them condone hurting other people because it makes them feel superior. It has nothing to do with Christianity.
I think the country is in horrible shape because of people like the majority of people you know. But I don’t try to foment violence on them, and while they have been spewing their lies about Democrats and non-Christians I never said we need to elect a leader who preaches hate and violence against them and lies and makes up stories about how evil they are to make more people hate them. I don’t support a leader who threatens them with harsh retribution for daring to disagree with his blatant lies and demands they be locked up, or perhaps shipped to a prison in another country to punish them.
I am not a Christian, but it seems like a huge insult to Christianity to offer those beliefs as reflecting any real Christianity. It sounds a lot like when terrorists kills hundreds of innocent children and cite their Islamic beliefs. That’s not Islam.
People who support Trump and cite their Christianity should be challenged on why they have no problem causing harm to Christians if they are Haitian immigrants who Trump lies about or undocumented Christians who came here for a better life and Trump cites as no different than murderous, violent gang members.
Religion was just their very lame excuse for condoning great harm to other people.
LikeLike
“We need to get back to Christ.”
Yep that’s what they think and say. How does one get back to Christ when that person never existed?
LikeLike
Duane,
I share your animus towards state-imposed religion.
But, I respect other people’s sincere religious beliefs as long as they respect others who don’t agree with them and teach love and kindness.
I think there was a human being known as Jesus of Nazareth. I believe that his message of love, peace, kindness, and gentleness is a wonderful message. I wish the people who call themselves his followers lived his message. Instead, they all too often practice hate, intolerance, rage, and cruelty. It would be a far better world if Christians lived and modeled what Jesus taught.
LikeLike
Everything Lautman says is spot on. The only twig I hang onto: the US’s free-speech, free-press democracy was not born yesterday– as were Germany’s pre-Hitler, Russia’s pre-Lenin/ Stalin/ Putin, Hungary’s pre-Orban, and that of Latin-American nations experiencing renewal of authoritarianism (currently Argentina). Granted, this makes us less savvy of the classic red flags she points to, which can make us slow to react.
Our history by contrast encompasses 250 yrs of democracy, during which various attempts at repression have been overcome– including a civil war to end slavery, riots, strikes, massacres, yellow journalism, periods of regional govtl corruption. And here we are, undergoing another challenge to democracy on a national scale. Ours if we can keep it.
LikeLike