Words Matter: Why Trump’s America is Now a ‘Regime’

It’s no longer fringe to say it: the US has descended into authoritarianism. Respected international security expert Emma Shortis called it in The Conversation when she said American democracy was “failing” and the US was “descending into authoritarianism”. Language matters in international relations. Words frame how the world sees power and how we all respond to it.

For decades, Australia and the rest of the world have referred to US ‘Administrations’. The term has been based on a presumption of accountable governance: an elected government and its officials managing policy within democratic rules and institutions. The Kennedy, Reagan, Bush, Obama and Biden governments were all described this way, just like we speak of the current Macron, Yoon and Ishiba administrations in France, South Korea and Japan.

‘Regimes’ by contrast, are about domination. They bend and break institutions to entrench personal rule. That’s why Russia, Iran, North Korea and China are described as regimes: their governing powers serve themselves, not democracy. Less than a year since Donald Trump’s return to the White House, the case for using ‘regime’ in the US is now clear.

Signs of authoritarian consolidation

Trump’s latest post on Truth Social, directing “Secretary of War” Pete Hegseth to deploy troops to “war-ravaged Portland” reads straight out of an authoritarian regime’s playbook. And it’s only the latest in a pattern.

Trump has been deploying the National Guard and federal agencies across the US to suppress dissent. Cities that resist have been threatened with emergency interventions. Trump is crossing the line from policing crime to suppressing protest and opposition. This fulfils his campaign promise: that he wouldn’t hesitate to use the Insurrection Act and military force against his own citizens. He has openly declared, “I hate them too” in reference to Democrats.

Just like in Nazi Germany, the machinery of deportation has been supercharged. Trump advisers are openly discussing the use of the wartime Alien Enemies Act and the construction of mass detention camps. These are not fringe proposals - they’re being actively discussed and planned from inside the Oval Office.

Abrupt cancellation of Jimmy Kimmel’s late-night show, under instruction from Trump, might have seemed harmless in isolation - especially after citizens’ protests and boycotts against Disney brought him back. But it also signalled a pattern: his abuse of state power to punish critics. Media outlets now face the threat of licence reviews, merger blockages, and ruinous lawsuits if they stray too far from Trump’s line. Even if no laws yet formally ban criticism, the chilling effect is real.

Trump has reinforced this explicitly, declaring at rallies and online that media criticism of him is “really illegal.” When the head of state talks about criminalising dissent, it is not just rhetoric. It is a directive - a signal to regulators and prosecutors to comply.

Veteran ABC journalist John Lyons was personally chastised by Trump and banned from White House press conferences after questioning the Trump’s business dealings. Excluding one of Australia’s most respected journalists is a pointed act of retaliation and a warning to international media that scrutiny is no longer tolerated.

Meanwhile, the US federal public service is being hollowed out. Trump’s Schedule F, an executive order to strip job protections from tens of thousands of public servants, is replacing those who resist. Professional neutrality is gone. Officials must now serve the man, not the Constitution.

And hovering above all of this is the US Supreme Court’s extraordinary ruling last year granting presidents immunity from prosecution for “official acts.” Combined with Trump’s willingness to stretch every legal instrument to its breaking point, this is an open invitation to authoritarianism.

Political scientists describe these systems as “competitive authoritarianism.” Elections might still officially happen, courts might still issue rulings, and opposition voices might still kind of exist. But the playing field is tilted so heavily that genuine competition is impossible.

In other words, America might still have a semblance of democracy, but its core is eroding. That’s why the term ‘regime’ captures the new reality better than ‘administration.’ It reminds us that what’s at stake is not just unpopular policies, but the survival of constitutional democracy.

Why Australians should care

For Australia, this matters profoundly. Since WWII, we’ve bound ourselves to the US through defence treaties, intelligence sharing, business investment and cultural influence. We’ve blindly committed ourselves to the $360 billion AUKUS agreement! But when the American President declares it illegal to criticise him, bans respected Australian journalists, and deploys troops on US city streets, it reverberates here too. Our own institutions - politicians, businesses, broadcasters, government agencies and universities - feel the pressure to align with Washington.

That’s why we need to face an uncomfortable truth. Australia must extract itself from reliance on the US as quickly as possible. Our security and prosperity can’t be permanently hitched to a country that has turned its back on democracy and is embracing authoritarianism.

Calling it a ‘regime’ isn’t an insult. It’s an act of clarity. It names a system in which coercion, intimidation, and loyalty to one man replace checks, balances, and freedoms that once defined one of the world’s oldest and proudest democracies.

Whether Americans can halt and reverse this slide remains to be seen. But what is clear is that Australia and the world should stop treating Trump’s rule as business-as-usual. Words matter. Let’s call it like it is. The Trump Regime.