US President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump stand together at the end of the US Army parade on June 14, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo: Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
“Democracy faces a perfect storm of autocratic resurgence and acute uncertainty,” said Kevin Casas-Zamora of the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.
A new report from a Swedish think tank warns that democracy is backsliding all across the world, led by the US under President Donald Trump.
The Stockholm-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) on Wednesday published findings from its annual Global State of Democracy report that found democracy is declining in 94 countries around the world, representing 54% of all nations the think tank analyzed.
“Democracy faces a perfect storm of autocratic resurgence and acute uncertainty, due to massive social and economic changes,” Kevin Casas-Zamora, secretary-general of IDEA, toldThe Guardian. “To fight back, democracies need to protect key elements of democracy, like elections and the rule of law, but also profoundly reform government so that it delivers fairness, inclusion, and shared prosperity.”
The US has shown itself to be in a particularly precarious position, as IDEA ranked the country well behind several other nations that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in the categories of rights, representation, and the rule of law.
The report includes data only from 2024, before the start of Trump’s second term, but it makes note of further negative developments that have occurred since his return to power.
“The rule of law has come under intensified pressure under the second Trump administration in the USA,” IDEA writes. “Since Trump took office in January 2025, his administration has issued a series of executive orders attempting to overhaul key aspects of governance, including the day-to-day functioning of the federal civil service, the country’s migration and asylum systems, and the balance of power between federal and state-level governments.”
IDEA adds that the administration has at times “disregarded or circumvented” court rulings, which has led to concerns about the rule of law in the US crumbling even further.
“The degree to which the balance of powers is respected in the months and years to come will be a key determinant of whether Rule of Law indicators in the USA remain resilient or continue to deteriorate,” the report stated.
In a separate interview with German publication Deutsche Welle, Casas-Zamora explained why developments in the US are dangerous not just to American citizens, but citizens in democracies around the planet.
“Some of the things that we saw during the election at the end of last year and in the first few months of 2025 are fairly disturbing,” he said.
The first months of Trump’s term were characterized by his attempts to seize constitutional powers from Congress by impounding federal funds, challenging the judiciary’s right to rule against the administration’s actions, and blatantly disobeying court orders.
“Since what happens in the US has this ability to go global,” said Casas-Zamora, “this does not bode well for democracy globally.”
US President Donald Trump speaks about the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025. (Photo: WhiteHouse.gov)
With the suspect still at large and the motive unknown, the president “seized the moment of widespread mourning to spread more hatred and division.”
Despite the fact that the murderer of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk remained unidentified and still at large, President Donald Trump declared the “radical left” as “directly responsible” for the assassination in remarks from the White House on Wednesday night—comments that critics say shows Trump is more than willing to exploit the killing for his own purposes while sowing more, not less, political violence in the future.
In a video address from the Oval Office, Trump said that criticism of Kirk from the left was “directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.”
The president didn’t specify which opponents of Kirk he believed contributed to his killing; over the years the influencer, who frequently visited college campuses to debate students, clashed with and was criticized by supporters of abortion rights, gun control, and immigrants’ rights. But Trump said his administration would “find each and every one of those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it.”
Trump did not detail how the White House would determine what groups “contributed” to Kirk’s killing.
“Radical left political violence has hurt too many innocent people and taken too many lives,” he asserted, though he did not mention any of the political violence—which is statistically more pervasive—on the political right.
Trump: "For years those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country and it must stop right now. My administration will find each and every one of… pic.twitter.com/dQwhTv52a9
The president was echoing sentiments expressed by far-right influencer Laura Loomer who has played a key role in shaping the Trump administration, lobbying for the hiring and removal of certain aides.
“It’s time for the Trump administration to shut down, defund, and prosecute every single leftist organization,” Loomer said Wednesday, even before Kirk was publicly pronounced dead. “We must shut these lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The left is a national security threat.”
In a Thursday op-ed for Common Dreams, author and journalist Christopher D. Cook laments how “Kirk had barely been declared dead when President Trump hideously used his killing to falsely blame and attack the left.”
The president, writes Cook, “seized the moment of widespread mourning to spread more hatred and division, in a reckless, angry televised speech that hurled blame at the left despite not a scintilla of evidence about Kirk’s assassin or their politics.”
Trump named a number of victims of political violence in recent years, including US Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), who was shot in 2017 by a man who opposed the president; and Trump himself, who survived two assassination attempts last year.
The president did not mention the killing earlier this year of Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman, a Democrat. The suspect in Hortman’s killing was an evangelical Christian who strongly opposed abortion and LGBTQ+ rights.
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) also asserted without any evidence that critics of the far-right agenda that Kirk embraced were to blame for his killing, specifically suggesting that her Democratic colleagues were implicated in the assassination.
“Democrats own what happened today,” she told reporters. “Some raging leftist lunatic put a bullet through his neck.”
Mace added that it was “ridiculous” to suggest that by her logic, Republican lawmakers “own” Hortman’s assassination.
The comments from Trump and Mace, wrote Cook, only show that these are “not the people who are going to lead us out of this ugly toxic pit” of political violence now pervasive in the United States.
At Zeteo, journalist Mehdi Hasan listed several other recent acts of political violence in which the suspected or confirmed perpetrators held right-wing ideologies, including the attempted assassination of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro earlier this year; the assault of then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband in 2022; and the attempted kidnapping of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in 2020.
“There is no equivalent or even similar list of Obama or Biden supporters who have carried out murders, attempted murders, or violent attacks against Republicans or conservatives in recent years,” wrote Hasan. “In fact, according to statistics compiled by the ADL’s Center on Extremism, 2024 was the third year in a row in which all of the extremist-related killings in the United States were carried out by… right-wingers.”
On the social media platform X, Texas Monthly senior writer Robert Downen pointed out that some far-right white supremacists had also “reviled” Kirk.
“I’m not speculating about the shooter,” said Downen. “I just have been stunned how quickly people have jumped with certainty to partisan conclusions. Because in extremism spaces, the Charlie Kirk Hater-to-Nazi pipeline is canon. It’s how we got a generation of antisemitic extremists.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) was quick to rebuke the suggestion that Democrats or left-wing groups are to blame for the rise in politically motivated attacks or the emergence of violence as a commonplace, acceptable occurrence in American culture.
“Oh, please,” she said when a reporter asked her whether Democrats should tone down their rhetoric. “Why don’t you start with the president of the United States, and every ugly meme he has posted, and every ugly word.”
In a podcast put together Wednesday evening in the wake of Kirk’s assassination, journalist David Sirota said that “what we desperately need right now in this country are leaders who lower the temperature, leaders who will try to pull us back from the brink.”
Instead, Sirota warned, “we have a president right now who seems mostly interested in using the bully pulpit to actually bully people. Inflaming every cultural conflict he can stick his nose into—all for the cause of grabbing more power and money for himself and his family.”
In place of more anger, hatred, and calls for political retribution, Sirota told his audience he wanted to offer a different message.
“It’s a simple message whether you are a leftist, a liberal, a centrist, a conservative, or a MAGA fan,” said Sirota. “Your life has value and your political opponents’ lives have value too. You can hate your adversaries’ ideas, and you can fight hard for your cause, but the moment we stop seeing each other as human beings and we start concluding that violence is the answer, that’s the moment we let the soulless corporations, the ruthless authoritarians, and the sociopathic demagogues win.”
The “nihilism” and “greed” of too many, he added, “are creating the conditions for a civil war—one that we must all do our part to stop. Before it becomes unstoppable.”
September 10 mobilization in Paris. Source: Mathilde Panot/X
Hundreds of mobilizations across France signaled public rejection of President Emmanuel Macron’s austerity path.
Hundreds of mobilizations, including picket lines and strikes, took place across France on September 10, signaling general rejection of a new wave of austerity policies advanced by the neoliberal camp. Trade unions reported significant participation in multiple sectors, including railways, education, culture, and health – where at least 100 work stoppages occurred during the day.
Grassroots networks estimate that approximately 500,000 people joined the demonstrations, held under the slogan “Let’s Block Everything” (Bloquons tout). Student collectives and Palestine solidarity groups were among those contributing to the day, among many others. Actions took place not only in major cities like Paris and Marseille but also in smaller towns such as Albi and Pau. The day was also marked by a heavy police presence and reports of violence against protesters, including the use of tear gas.
The mobilization came just days after another prime minister appointed by President Emmanuel Macron, François Bayrou, lost a confidence vote in the National Assembly. Macron quickly replaced him with former defense minister Sébastien Lecornu, a representative of the center’s right-wing faction. The appointment irked the public further. Maurizio Coppola of the Italian left party Potere al Popolo, who took part in the actions, told Peoples Dispatch: “Many saw this hasty appointment of a new prime minister as a provocation on the eve of the mobilization.”
Demonstrators also saw Lecornu’s appointment as a sign that Macron continues to pursue policies repeatedly rejected by the public. In a recent speech, France Unbowed (La France Insoumise) leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon highlighted the devastating social impact of neoliberal economic policies, pointing out that thousands of children and hundreds of thousands of people in France are homeless. Poverty and inequality, he described, plague the country. The trade union group Solidaires offered similar reflections on the day of action: “After the fall of the Bayrou government, the head of state’s desire to pursue the same policy in the service of special interests can only exacerbate fiscal and social inequalities and the ecological crisis.”
“He must go”
“Macron is to blame for this situation,” Mélenchon wrote on September 10. “He and his decisions are responsible for the chaos. He makes no effort whatsoever to show that he is receiving or listening to the messages coming from the National Assembly or the country. On the contrary, he brazenly pushes ahead to show that he remains in control of his strange and absurd plans. He must go.”
Protesters marching with banner: “Against the war economy. United for bread, peace, and liberty.” Lille, September 10, 2025. Source: Aurélien Le Coq/X
France Unbowed has campaigned for Macron’s removal since the 2024 national election, when he blocked the progressive New Popular Front (Nouveau Front Populaire) from forming a cabinet despite its electoral result, instead entrusting government formation to a succession of neoliberals. The party renewed its call after Bayrou’s collapse but also threw its weight behind the ongoing grassroots struggles. Coppola noted that activists from France Unbowed were active in preparing demonstrations across communities, helping amplify and link popular demands. “Their elected representatives marched with the protesters, defending them from police violence through their institutional status,” he added.
The role of organized labor
Despite the success of the day of action, questions remain. One concerns the role of labor unions, Coppola suggests. While certain unions and confederations, notably Solidaires, joined the call for September 10, others kept more distance. Branches of the General Confederation of Labor (Confédération générale du travail, CGT) and Workers’ Force (Force Ouvrière) participated in the actions, but their leadership chose to emphasize a strike call for September 18. By doing so, these organizations echoed popular demands against austerity but did not fully align themselves with the grassroots initiative.
The ability of grassroots groups and labor unions to connect over and channel the anger that fueled the “Let’s Block Everything” protests may have an important impact on the mobilization’s long-term success. As Coppola points out, “where strikes and blockades were successful, this was only possible thanks to the presence of organized labor.” However, he also adds that some unions joined the day of action only because rank-and-file members pushed for it, highlighting how bottom-up participation remains vital across the struggle.
Another unresolved question is the feasibility of France Unbowed’s proposal to remove Macron. While such an outcome would potentially be a significant victory against austerity, it would trigger new presidential elections with uncertain results. In 2024, the far-right National Rally (Rassemblement National) secured more votes than the left-progressive alliance, making the prospect of an extreme right president a genuine risk.
Nevertheless, the message of September 10 was unmistakable and is unlikely to fade soon. “The message was clear everywhere: no to the [austerity] financial maneuver, [yes to the] strengthening of public services and workers’ rights, taxing the rich, and above all, the resignation of President Macron,” Coppola concluded.
Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. Photo: Huete
He is already under house arrest, but if convicted, he would be taken to a cell only after the sentence becomes final.
The answer to the question is yes. In fact, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro is already under house arrest after failing to comply with precautionary measures imposed by the reporting judge in the criminal case investigating the attempted coup in Brazil, Alexandre de Moraes, such as the prohibition on using social media.
Lawyer Ney Strozake states that preventive detention could be imposed if there is a risk of flight. “If he [Bolsonaro] flees or takes actions that clearly demonstrate that he is going to flee, what could happen is that the Attorney General’s Office could request preventive detention and Alexandre Moraes could order preventive detention. But [only] because he is preparing to flee or because he has fled, which is the case with [Carla] Zambelli. She is already abroad and has announced that she has fled. Then her preventive detention was ordered. In Bolsonaro’s case, this could also happen,” explained the lawyer.
However, these are preventive measures, which are primarily aimed at ensuring the smooth running of the proceedings and are unlikely to be taken on the eve of a sentence. The final arrest, in compliance with a possible sentence established by the First Panel of the Supreme Federal Court (STF), will still take a little more time, and this depends on how the five ministers will vote.
Possibilities for appeals
If there are at least two disagreements among the justices regarding the merits of the case, that is, regarding the conviction or acquittal of the defendants, the defense may file appeals to bring the case to the full court, known as infringements. The deadline for the defense to file these appeals is ten days, and there is no deadline for the court to decide whether to accept them.
If there is not this minimum number of disagreements on the merits, the defense will be limited to only one possibility of appeal: the so-called motions for clarification. In this case, there is no possibility of changing the majority decision, but lawyers may contest or even request clarification regarding any measure imposed in the sentence, or request, for example, immediate progression to house arrest for health reasons. For this type of appeal, the deadline for filing defenses is five days after the sentence, and the judge in the case has the same amount of time to rule on them.
Jail only after the final judgment
According to the understanding established by the STF, those convicted will only begin serving their sentences after the so-called final judgment, that is, when there are no more possibilities for appeals.
Former President Jair Bolsonaro and seven other defendants are identified by the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) as the “crucial nucleus” of the coup plot. They are accused of the crimes of armed criminal organization, attempted violent abolition of the Democratic Rule of Law, coup d’état, damage qualified by violence and serious threat, and deterioration of listed heritage.
Together, the penalties related to the crimes identified by the Attorney General’s Office could total 43 years in prison, considering the maximum penalties for each crime and the possibility of aggravating circumstances.
In addition to the former president, seven other men, all close allies during his administration, are being tried this week. They are: Alexandre Ramagem (former head of the Brazilian Intelligence Agency, Abin, and now a federal deputy for the Liberal Party in Rio de Janeiro); Almir Garnier Santos (former Navy commander); Anderson Torres (former Minister of Justice); Augusto Heleno (Army general and former Minister of Institutional Security); Mauro Cid (Bolsonaro’s former aide-de-camp); Paulo Sérgio Nogueira (who, like Braga Netto, was also Minister of Defense); and Walter Braga Netto (Army general and former Minister of Defense and Chief of Staff).
Among the eight defendants, Ramagem is the only one charged with three crimes, rather than five, as the charges of aggravated damage and deterioration of listed property (relating to January 8) were suspended, since he was already a certified congressman at the time and therefore had parliamentary immunity.
With the exception of whistleblower Mauro Cid, who has confessed to the charges, the others claim innocence.
This article was first published in Brasil de Fato in Portuguese.
The price of eggs has more than doubled in the past eight years, which isn’t great, but at least you can eat eggs. The price of US government subsidies for the fossil-fuel industry has also more than doubled in that time, which is far, far less great. Welfare for an industry that makes billions of dollars in profits and pollutes the climate is worse than useless. It’s self-destructive.
The federal government gives oil, gas and coal producers at least $34.8 billion in subsidies each year, according to a new study by the research and advocacy nonprofit Oil Change International. In 2017, OCI estimated these gifts at $14.7 billion annually. This doubling in federal largesse has taken place under both Democratic and Republican political administrations, highlighting the difficulty of stopping its growth, much less reversing it.
In fact, some of the most recent extensions of federal aid have made it possible for these subsidies to explode in the future, threatening to reach trillions of dollars. When the world needs exponential growth in clean-energy investments to avoid the most catastrophic effects of global heating, the US government will be bankrolling fossil-fuel expansion and stoking the emergency.
Donald Trump urges you to be a Climate Science denier like him. He says that he makes millions and millions for destroying the planet, Burn, Baby, Burn and Flood, Baby, Flood.Greenpeace activists display a billboard during a protest outside Shell headquarters on July 27, 2023 in London. (Photo: Handout/Chris J. Ratcliffe for Greenpeace via Getty Images)Experienced climbers scale a rock face near the historic Dumbarton castle in Glasgow, releasing a banner that reads “Climate on a Cliff Edge.” One activist, dressed as a globe, symbolically looms near the edge, while another plays the bagpipes on the shores below. | Photo courtesy of Extinction Rebellion and Mark Richards
