The Constitution was drafted in a world vastly different from our own—sparse in population, slow in communication, and fearful above all of monarchy. The Framers promised that the new office of President would be tightly bound by checks and balances, “much inferior” to a king, and forever accountable to the people. Yet more than two centuries later, the presidency has expanded far beyond what Alexander Hamilton and James Madison envisioned. In the actions and rhetoric of Donald Trump, we see patterns that echo the authoritarian and even fascistic playbooks the Federalists warned against.
This post explores those tensions. It begins by revisiting Hamilton’s assurances in The Federalist Papers about the limits of presidential power. It then considers Trump’s conduct—from undermining elections to pardoning January 6 rioters—and how these moves resemble historical examples of democratic backsliding. The post positions today’s crisis in longer cycles of governance by drawing parallels to the fall of the Roman Republic and applying the ecological theory of panarchy, which shows how systems move through phases of growth, rigidity, collapse, and renewal. Finally, it looks ahead to the next decade, weighing whether the United States will enter a phase of democratic renewal or reorganize into a more authoritarian order.
In the beginning
When the Constitution was signed in 1787, Americans had just thrown off monarchy. No one wanted another king. That’s why the Framers built a presidency deliberately weaker than the crown.
Alexander Hamilton, writing in Federalist No. 69, reassured anxious citizens that the President would be “much inferior” to monarchy. The King of England ruled for life; the President would serve four years. The King could declare war, raise armies, appoint judges, and levy taxes alone; the President could do none of these things without Congress or the Senate. Most importantly, the King was beyond reach of the law, while the President would be subject to impeachment and removal. As Hamilton put it:
“The one [the President] would be an officer elected for four years; the other [the King] is a perpetual and hereditary prince. The one would be amenable to personal punishment and disgrace; the person of the other is sacred and inviolable.” [1]
That was the promise. But what we are witnessing today looks nothing like Hamilton’s limited magistrate. It looks a lot more like the monarchy he swore America would never endure.
The Authoritarian Playbook
Donald Trump has repeatedly undermined elections, spread lies about their legitimacy, and pressured the Justice Department to serve his personal ends. He brands opponents as enemies, calls the press “the enemy of the people,” and casts himself as the sole voice of “real America.” These are not isolated outbursts. They mirror the authoritarian playbook: delegitimize elections, weaken independent institutions, weaponize state power against rivals, and build a mass base of loyal supporters fueled by grievance. [2][3]
Consider the events following the 2020 election. Trump promoted the baseless “stop the steal” movement, pressured officials to “find” votes, and encouraged a mob that stormed the Capitol to block certification. The House January 6th Committee documented these acts as part of a coordinated effort to overturn a lawful election. [4] That is not constitutional behavior. That is the behavior of an autocrat.
And the authoritarian playbook extends beyond elections. This year, ABC suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! indefinitely after the host mocked conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The suspension followed political pressure from affiliates and pointed warnings from FCC officials appointed by Trump, who hinted at “additional work for the FCC ahead” if broadcasters did not rein in criticism. [5][6] This kind of regulatory intimidation—silencing dissent through threats rather than laws—is an end-run around the First Amendment. It is exactly the sort of abuse of power the Framers feared.
James Madison warned in Federalist No. 51 that “ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” [7] The system would only survive if institutions checked each other. But when an entire party chooses loyalty to one man over loyalty to the Constitution, Madison’s safeguard collapses. Instead of ambition checking ambition, it fortifies a would-be monarch.
The Lesson of Rome
The Roman Republic provides a sobering parallel. Like the United States, Rome designed checks and balances—two consuls sharing power, tribunes of the plebs to protect common citizens, and a Senate to restrain rash decisions. Like the U.S., Rome relied not just on laws but on norms: consuls stepping down after their term, generals not marching on Rome, elites accepting peaceful transfers of power.
Rome lasted nearly 500 years before collapsing into empire. Its undoing came when ambitious men like Marius, Sulla, and Caesar decided that personal loyalty mattered more than republican norms. Armies became tools of political leaders, the Senate lost legitimacy, and once-sacred guardrails fell one by one. Augustus declared the republic preserved, but in reality he had created monarchy under another name.
The American Founders knew Rome’s story. They built the Constitution to prevent a Caesar. Yet Trump’s disregard for institutional norms—and his demand that personal loyalty outweigh constitutional duty—echoes the very pattern that doomed Rome.
Panarchy and the Adaptive Cycle of Governance
To understand these patterns, it helps to borrow from ecology. Scholar C. S. Holling’s concept of panarchy describes how complex systems—forests, economies, governments—follow an adaptive cycle:
- Exploitation (r): Rapid growth and expansion.
- Conservation (K): Institutions stabilize, but become rigid.
- Release (Ω): Collapse or crisis breaks down accumulated structures.
- Reorganization (α): Renewal, reform, or reinvention.
Governance systems are not static. They move through cycles, and multiple cycles interact across scales.
- Athens: burst of democratic innovation (r), slow entrenchment (K), collapse under Macedon (Ω), influence on later republics (α).
- Rome: centuries of republican conservation (K), crises under ambitious generals (Ω), reorganization into empire (α).
- The United States: Founding and expansion (r), long consolidation of institutions (K), and now—polarization, norm erosion, authoritarian temptations—perhaps entering release (Ω).
If so, the next decade is the reorganization phase (α). America could renew its democracy, reforming institutions to meet modern conditions. Or it could reorganize around a less democratic, more authoritarian model.
What Will America Look Like in 10 Years?
Two futures diverge:
- If authoritarianism consolidates: Hollow elections, weaponized justice, muzzled press, rights granted by favor not law. A United States resembling Orbán’s Hungary more than Madison’s republic.
- If institutions hold: Polarization persists, but democracy endures—fractious, imperfect, but intact.
Which path prevails depends not on Trump alone, but on whether citizens and institutions insist that ambition counteract ambition, or whether partisan loyalty continues to eclipse constitutional duty.
The Choice Before Us
Hamilton and Madison knew republics are fragile. They trusted ambition, institutions, and citizens to guard against monarchy. But history—from Rome to modern Hungary—teaches that republics collapse when ambition stops checking ambition and starts serving it.
Hamilton assured Americans the presidency would never resemble a king. Trump’s words and deeds suggest otherwise. The next decade will decide whether the United States enters a phase of democratic renewal—or follows Rome into empire under another name.
References
- Hamilton, A. (1788/2023a). Federalist No. 69: The real character of the executive. Avalon Project, Yale Law School. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed69.asp
- Levitsky, S., & Ziblatt, D. (2018). How democracies die. Crown Publishing.
- Paxton, R. O. (2004). The anatomy of fascism. Alfred A. Knopf.
- Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report. U.S. Government Publishing Office. https://www.govinfo.gov/app/collection/january-6th-committee-report
- AP News. (2025, January 23). ABC pulls Jimmy Kimmel Live! after Charlie Kirk comments. https://apnews.com/article/a2bfa904429c318fe52e7d3493c6883d
- New York Magazine. (2025, January 24). Why Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension is a chilling sign for free speech. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/jimmy-kimmel-canceled-kirk-crackdown-reaction-analysis-updates.html
- Madison, J. (1788/2023). Federalist No. 51. Library of Congress. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-47-51
- Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems, 4(5), 390–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5
Image Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1476945X1830165X
Confronting Mediocrity 