Twelve months back, the environment was completely separate. Before the US presidential election, considerate citizens could recognize the nation's deep flaws – its inequities and imbalance – yet they could still identify it as the US. A free society. A land where the rule of law meant something. A state led by a respectable and upright official, even with his elderly years and declining health.
Currently, in late October 2025, countless Americans scarcely know the land we inhabit. People alleged as unauthorized foreigners are detained and shoved into transport, at times refused legal rights. The East Wing of the presidential residence – is undergoing demolition for a grotesque event space. The leader is harassing his adversaries or supposed enemies and insisting the justice department transfer a huge total of public funds. Uniformed troops are being sent to US urban areas under fabricated reasons. The defense headquarters, rebranded the Department of War, has – in effect – freed itself of routine media oversight as it spends what could amount to nearly $1tn from citizen taxes. Institutions, attorney offices, media outlets are submitting under the president’s threats, and billionaires are handled as members of the royal family.
“The United States, just months before its 250-year mark as the globe's top democratic nation, has fallen over the edge into autocracy and totalitarianism,” a noted author, wrote this past summer. “Finally, swifter than I thought feasible, it did happen in this country.”
Every morning starts amid recent atrocities. And it is challenging to understand – and painful to realize – just how far gone our nation is, and the speed at which it has happened.
Nevertheless, we understand that Trump was legitimately chosen. Following his deeply disturbing previous administration and despite the warnings linked to the knowledge of Project 2025 – even after Trump himself declared plainly he planned to be a dictator solely at the start – a majority of citizens selected him rather than Kamala Harris.
Frightening as the present situation is, it’s even scarier to realize that we have only been several months into this presidential term. How will an additional three years of this deterioration position us? And suppose that timeframe turns into an prolonged era, as there is not anyone to stop this leader from opting that additional tenure is required, perhaps for security concerns?
Certainly, there is still hope. There are midterm elections the coming year that may establish an alternate political equilibrium, should Democrats regain the Senate or House of the legislature. There exist government representatives who are trying to impose some accountability, like representatives that are launching an investigation into the attempted cash appropriation from the justice department.
And a leadership election three years from now could initiate the path to healing precisely as the prior selection placed us on this regrettable path.
There exist millions of Americans demonstrating in public spaces of their cities, like they performed in the past days during anti-authority protests.
An ex-cabinet member, wrote recently that “the dormant powerhouse of the nation is awakening”, similar to past following the Red Scare in the 1950s or amid the sixties activism or during the seventies crisis.
On those occasions, the unstable nation ultimately corrected itself.
Reich says he knows the indicators of that revival and observes it occurring now. For proof, he references the large-scale demonstrations, the broad, cross-party resistance against a broadcaster's firing and the near-unanimous rejection by reporters to sign the defense department’s demands they only publish authorized information.
“The slumbering entity always remains inactive till specific greed turns extremely harmful, a particular deed so disrespectful of societal benefit, some brutality so noisy, that it is forced except to rise.”
It’s an optimistic take, and I appreciate the author's seasoned opinion. Possibly he may turn out correct.
In the meantime, the big questions remain: will the nation return to normalcy? Can it retrieve its position in the world and its devotion to the rule of law?
Or must we acknowledge that the historical project worked for a while, and then – swiftly, totally – ended?
My cynical mind suggests that the final scenario is correct; that everything might be lost. My optimistic spirit, nevertheless, tells me that we must try, by any means possible.
For me, as a media critic, that means urging journalists to commit, more fully, to their duty of scrutinizing authority. For others, it may be participating in political races, or planning demonstrations, or developing approaches to safeguard ballot privileges.
Under twelve months back, we existed in a very different place. Twelve months later? Or after another term? The fact is, we are uncertain. All we can do is try to not give up.
The interaction I experience during teaching with young journalists, who are both hopeful and realistic, {always
