Viewed through the lens of authoritarianism, Trump’s approach to governing is logical and coherent.
For example, an authoritarian wouldn’t follow the normal constitutional process for disputing a judicial decision he dislikes — which is to appeal it to a higher court.
An authoritarian would instead assail judges who rule against him, as Trump has done repeatedly. He’d also threaten to hobble the offending courts, as Trump did last week in urging that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (where many of these decisions have originated) be broken up.
LOCAL COMMENTARY: What are we willing to do for our at-risk kids?
Likewise, an authoritarian has no patience for normal legislative rules — designed, as they are in a democracy, to create opportunities for deliberation. Which is why Trump told Mitch McConnell to use the “nuclear option” against the time-honored Senate filibuster in order to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.
Last week, Trump called House and Senate rules “archaic” and urged they be abandoned. “We don’t have a lot of closers in politics, and I understand why: It’s a very rough system. It’s an archaic system,” he said.
Through the eyes of an authoritarian, rules that block what the authoritarian wants to do are always "bad for the country," as Trump said of them.
Trump would like to get rid of the filibuster altogether. “The filibuster concept is not a good concept to start off with,” he said.
An authoritarian also seeks to intimidate the press in order to avoid criticism and consolidate his power.
Trump still doesn’t miss an opportunity to assail the media for publishing “fake news.” On Sunday, his chief of staff has even revived Trump’s campaign proposal to widen libel laws so that Trump can sue the press for stories he doesn’t like.
Authoritarians do not tolerate other levels of government with their own powers and responsibilities. Which is why Trump wants to force states and cities to report on unauthorized immigrants, even though this violates the principle of federalism enshrined in the 10th Amendment.
PERSPECTIVE: We have a double standard when it comes to religion and violence.
Finally, authoritarians promote other authoritarians, in an effort to normalize authoritarian rule.
Last Saturday, Trump invited Rodrigo Duterte, president of the Philippines, to visit the White House.
Duterte, you should know, is an authoritarian leader accused of ordering extrajudicial killings of thousands of people suspected of using or selling narcotics, as well as others who may have had no involvement with drugs. He has referred to former President Barack Obama as a “son of a whore.” And he has declared open season on suspected terrorists, saying that if he were presented with a suspected terrorist, “give me salt and vinegar and I’ll eat his liver.”
Two weeks ago, Trump phoned to congratulate Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for his victory in a referendum (filled with voting irregularities) that expanded Erdogan’s powers and has put Turkey on the road to dictatorship.
Trump also opined that the recent terrorist attack in Paris should help the right-wing extremist Marine Le Pen.
Trump has praised President Xi Jinping of China, the most authoritarian leader China has had since Mao Zedong.
Trump also hosted at the White House Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who had not been granted an invitation to the White House since seizing power in a military coup almost four years ago.
And don’t forget Trump’s vow during the presidential campaign to pursue a warmer relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. (The effort has faltered in light of possible links between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.)
Donald Trump’s authoritarianism is a consistent and coherent philosophy of governing.
But it’s not America’s.
In fact, the framers of the U.S. Constitution created separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism precisely to avoid concentrated power. Their goal was to stop authoritarians such as Donald Trump.
Not long ago, Trump adviser Stephen Miller declared “the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.” Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin and Hamilton would have been appalled.