ANALYSIS | U.S. could lose democracy status, says global watchdog | CBC News

This is only the beginning of the "pushback" the Trump administration will see in the coming months/years. The current world order is threatened and will "not go gentle into that good night".

"If it continues like this, the United States will not score as a democracy when we release [next year's] data," said Staffan Lindberg, head of the Varieties of Democracy project, run out of Sweden's University of Gothenburg.

The number of autocracies (91) has just surpassed democracies (88) on this list for the first time in two decades, and nearly three-quarters of humans now live in an autocracy — where one person has unconstrained power — the highest rate in five decades.

My Response to this CBC news article: The CBC article’s framing of Trump’s 2025 actions—like using the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport alleged gang members or pushing executive authority—could be seen as "common sense" responses to serious crimes (rape, murder) rather than just autocratic overreach. It also highlights a potential oversight: the article doesn’t weigh the context of these actions (e.g., public safety) or the political leanings of opposing actors (e.g., the "far left" federal judge).

Factual Gaps:
The article lacks specifics (e.g., which agency was "deleted," exact pardon numbers beyond 1,600 in the video). Some claims (e.g., "purging apolitical brass") are broad and unproven without names or dates. The deportation flight details are chaotic but lack a definitive ruling on defiance—still "in dispute," as noted.

Tone and Framing:
The article is alarmist—"depressing," "dire," "unthinkable"—and frames Trump’s actions as an existential threat to democracy. This mirrors CBC’s historical coverage of Trump (e.g., January 6, 2021), which emphasizes the controversy over nuance. It "admonishes" executive actions, suggesting misalignment with this piece’s focus on 2025 moves, not 2017–2024 legislation.

Positive aspects of Trump’s agenda (e.g., economic deregulation, voter support) are absent, skewing the narrative toward erosion rather than governance trade-offs.

Expert Quotes:
Lindberg and Miller, both credible (V-Dem head, GWU professor), lean toward democratic erosion narratives in their work. Their views are valid but not uncontested—other scholars (e.g., Freedom House) might still score the U.S. higher despite 2025 turbulence. CBC doesn’t balance with pro-Trump or neutral experts.

Bias: Present—CBC frames Trump as a fast-tracked autocrat, omitting balance (e.g., policy wins, democratic resilience). It aligns with a center-left, Canadian lens wary of U.S. conservatism, consistent with CBC’s editorial history. The "electoral autocracy" label is plausible but speculative, hinging on future court battles and untested crises (e.g., pardon reversals).

The U.S. republic has resilient features—federalism, bicameralism, state autonomy—that resist total autocracy. Trump’s moves, while aggressive, face pushback (e.g., Roberts’ rebuke, ACLU lawsuits). The article’s "six months" timeline feels hyperbolic; democratic erosion (e.g., Turkey’s) typically takes years, not months, and the U.S.’s 236-year republican tradition isn’t easily undone. It should be noted that Trump has been in office for 59 days as of this day. (3/19/2025)

SGM Jeff Mccloud CMSgt (Join to see) COL (Join to see) MSG Stan Hutchison @cpl