United States of Authoritarianism: Why Democracies Must Stand Firm
In a powerful speech delivered on February 20, 2025, Bernie Sanders highlighted a critical moment in global politics—one that underscores the battle between democracy and authoritarianism. The speech, prompted by President Donald Trump’s seeming alignment with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions and the psychological underpinnings that allow authoritarian leaders to thrive.
Trump’s Misinformation and the Objective Facts
Here are just a few claims made by President Trump regarding the war in Ukraine and international relations. Understanding the truth behind these statements is essential to combat misinformation and uphold democratic integrity.
1. Trump’s Claim: "Ukraine started the war."
Fact: Russia invaded Ukraine twice—first in 2014 when it annexed Crimea, and again in 2022 in a full-scale invasion. Ukraine was the victim of aggression, not the instigator.
2. Trump’s Claim: "Volodymyr Zelensky is a dictator."
Fact: Zelensky was democratically elected in 2019 with 75% of the vote. Ukraine continues to have a functioning parliament and political opposition, despite being under attack, and as of today Zelensky has a higher approval rating than Trump.
3. Trump’s Claim: "Europe has done little to support Ukraine compared to the U.S."
Fact: European nations have provided significant aid to Ukraine, collectively surpassing U.S. contributions in both financial and humanitarian assistance.
4. Trump’s Alignment with Putin:
Trump has continuously shown admiration for Vladimir Putin, a leader known for suppressing dissent, staging sham elections, and orchestrating violent crackdowns on opposition. This raises serious concerns about Trump’s vision for global democracy.
Trump’s repeated misinformation, coupled with his attempts to undermine democratic institutions, poses a significant threat to the truth and the values of democratic governance.
Understanding Authoritarianism and Its Appeal
Authoritarian regimes, such as Putin’s Russia, function on a well-documented psychological blueprint. Research in political psychology suggests that authoritarian leaders maintain control by appealing to fear, fostering division, and manipulating information.
1. Fear and Security: Studies have shown that when people feel threatened—whether by economic uncertainty, external conflicts, or social change—they are more likely to gravitate toward strong, authoritative leaders. This phenomenon, known as the “authoritarian dynamic” (Stenner, 2005), explains why autocratic figures often leverage crises to consolidate power. Putin, for example, has positioned himself as Russia’s defender against perceived Western aggression, a narrative that justifies his crackdown on dissent.
2. The Role of Propaganda and Disinformation: Trump’s misinformation regarding Ukraine echo Putin’s own disinformation campaigns. The psychological concept of the “illusory truth effect” (Hasher, Goldstein, & Toppino, 1977) explains why repeated lies, even when debunked, become accepted as truth. Authoritarian leaders use this tactic to shape public perception, turning democratic adversaries into villains while masking their own abuses.
3. In-group vs. Out-group Psychology: Trump’s alignment with Putin exemplifies a broader strategy seen in authoritarian politics: the division of society into “us” versus “them.” This form of tribalism fosters loyalty among supporters and justifies hostility toward political opponents, the media, and international allies. Social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) highlights how individuals derive self-worth from group affiliations, making them susceptible to leaders who exploit these divisions.
The Psychological Costs of Authoritarianism
Beyond the immediate political consequences, authoritarian regimes inflict deep psychological harm on societies.
1. Suppression of Free Thought: In Putin’s Russia, as Sanders pointed out, political dissidents are jailed or killed. When free speech is suppressed, it stifles creativity, innovation, and intellectual growth. Psychological research has linked environments of censorship and oppression with increased rates of anxiety, depression, and learned helplessness (Seligman, 1972).
2. Normalization of Violence: Russia’s aggression in Ukraine demonstrates how authoritarian leaders use war as a means of maintaining control. The moral disengagement theory (Bandura, 1999) explains how individuals in such societies become desensitized to violence, accepting human rights abuses as justifiable actions for national security or cultural superiority.
Democracy as a Psychological Necessity
Sanders’ message—an urgent call to stand for democracy—aligns with psychological research emphasizing the benefits of democratic governance.
1. Psychological Well-being and Freedom: Studies have consistently shown that democratic societies report higher levels of happiness, social trust, and mental well-being compared to authoritarian regimes (Inglehart et al., 2008). The ability to participate in governance, access uncensored information, and challenge authority without fear contributes to a sense of autonomy and personal agency—key components of psychological well-being.
2. Collective Resilience Against Authoritarianism: Psychological resilience is strengthened when societies prioritize democratic values, civic engagement, and critical thinking. Education systems that promote media literacy and democratic principles can serve as safeguards against authoritarian encroachment (Van der Linden et al., 2017).
Simply Put
Sanders’ speech is a reminder that democracy is not self-sustaining; it requires vigilance, informed engagement, and resistance against authoritarian influences. The psychological appeal of authoritarianism can be countered by fostering critical thinking, promoting transparency, and reinforcing the values of freedom and human dignity.
In a time of global political uncertainty, the choice is clear: democracy must be defended, not only as a political system but as a foundation for psychological well-being and human progress.
