Tuesday, May 27, 2025

Trump’s West Point speech brought partisanship to the home of the US military − 2 essential reads

President Donald Trump delivers the commencement address at West Point on May 24, 2025. AP Photo/Adam Gray
Jeff Inglis, The Conversation

President Donald Trump’s speech at the graduation of the class of 2025 from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point included segments that were clearly scripted and portions that were obviously not.

During the unscripted portions, Trump, who wore a bright red “Make America Great Again” campaign hat during his entire appearance on May 24, 2025, delivered remarks that hit many of his frequent partisan political talking points. That included attacking presidential predecessors Barack Obama and Joe Biden, describing immigrants to the U.S. as “criminals” and trumpeting other policy accomplishments in his first and second terms.

That level of partisanship in a military setting – on the campus of the nation’s first military academy, and before an audience of cadets and their families, many of whom are veterans – is unusual in the United States.

The Conversation U.S. has published several articles discussing the importance to democracy of keeping the military and partisan politics separate. Here are two highlights from that coverage.

1. Cadets focus on the Constitution

During the West Point ceremony, the graduates themselves took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” And all of them had studied the significance of that oath, including in classes like those taught by Joseph G. Amoroso and Lee Robinson, active-duty Army officers who graduated from West Point and later served as professors there.

As Amoroso and Robinson wrote, those classes teach cadets that, like all military personnel, they serve the Constitution and the American people, not a particular person or political party:

(O)ur oath forms the basis of a nonpartisan ethic. In the U.S., unlike in many other countries, the oath implies military leaders should be trusted for their expertise and judgment, not for their loyalty to an individual or political party. We emphasize to cadets the rules and professional expectations associated with this profound responsibility.”

2. A tradition of nonpartisanship

Retired U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. Samuel C. Mahaney, who teaches history, national security and constitutional law at Missouri University of Science and Technology, observed:

(S)ince the days of George Washington, the military has been dedicated to serving the nation, not a specific person or political agenda. … (N)onpartisanship is central to the military’s primary mission of defending the country.”

Mahaney wrote that if Trump’s actions during his second term meant a change from the centuries of precedent, “military personnel at all levels would face a crucial question: Would they stand up for the military’s independent role in maintaining the integrity and stability of American democracy or follow the president’s orders – even if those orders crossed a line that made them illegal or unconstitutional?”

Presenting a key question for military personnel.

This story was updated to highlight two articles from The Conversation’s archives.

Jeff Inglis, Environment + Energy Editor, The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Tuesday, January 28, 2025

What’s behind Trump’s flurry of executive action: 4 essential reads on autocrats and authoritarianism

President Donald Trump shows off one of his new orders upon taking office. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Jeff Inglis, The Conversation

If you think a lot is happening in the federal government all at once on a lot of different issues, you’re right.

At the beginning of a new presidential administration, there is often a flurry of changes – new Cabinet appointments and a few executive orders. But what’s happening right now in Washington, D.C. – actions affecting immigration, tariffs, the firing of career government workers, gender identity, federally funded research, foreign aid and even broader categories of federal spending – is different from most presidential transitions, in volume, pace, content and breadth of the changes ordered.

Administration officials and Trump allies have described all this action as a “shock and awe” campaign intended to “flood the zone.” Translation: It’s both an effort to demonstrate autocratic power and an effort to overwhelm and exhaust people who might resist the changes.

The Conversation U.S. has published several articles – many from Donald Trump’s first term as president – that spell out how autocrats, and those who want to be autocrats, behave and why. Here are some key points to know.

1. Seize executive power

The move toward autocracy starts with wielding unyielding power over not only people but democratic institutions, explained Shelley Inglis, a scholar of international law at the University of Dayton. In a checklist of 10 items for wannabe authoritarians, the first task, she wrote, is being strong:

The mainstay of today’s authoritarianism is strengthening your power while simultaneously weakening government institutions, such as parliaments and judiciaries, that provide checks and balances. The key is to use legal means that ultimately give democratic legitimacy to the power grab.”

2. Control political backers

When a leader’s supporters are more loyal to the person than their political party, that creates what is called a “personalist party,” as scholars of political science Erica Frantz at Michigan State University, Joe Wright at Penn State and Andrea Kendall-Taylor at Yale University described. That creates a danger to democracy, they wrote:

(W)hat matters for democracy is not so much the ambitions of power-hungry leaders, but rather whether those in their support group will tame them. … (W)hen personalist ruling parties hold legislative majorities and the presidency … there is little that stands in the way of a grab for power.”

A man stands waving to a crowd of people holding signs.
Many Republican Party members back Trump, in part because other party leaders signal their own support. AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki

3. Sideline the public

In a democracy, the public has power. But if the people choose not to exercise it, that leaves room for an authoritarian leader to take more control, warned Mark Satta, a professor of philosophy and law at Wayne State University in an article comparing George Orwell’s book “Nineteen eighty-four” to modern events:

Trump routinely speaks like an autocrat. Yet many Americans excuse such talk, failing to treat it as the evidence of a threat to democracy that it is. This seems to me to be driven in part by the tendency Orwell identified to think that truly bad things won’t happen – at least not in one’s own country.”

A man dressed in red, white and blue hugging and kissing an American flag.
Donald Trump hugs an American flag as he arrives at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Feb. 24, 2024, in Baltimore. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

4. Depend on complacency

Another scholar delivered a warning of a possible future. Vickie Sullivan, a political science scholar at Tufts University, studies Renaissance writer Niccolò Machiavelli, who lived from 1469 to 1527.

He is perhaps most widely known for encouraging “sole rulers – his phrase for authoritarians or dictators – … to use force and fraud to gain and maintain power,” she wrote. But Machiavelli had advice for the public, too, Sullivan explained:

“He instructs republican citizens and leaders … to recognize how vulnerable the governments they cherish are and to be vigilant against the threats of tyranny. … If republican citizens and leaders fail to be vigilant, they will eventually be confronted with a leader who has accumulated an extremely powerful and threatening following. At that point, Machiavelli says, it will be too late to save the republic.”

This story is a roundup of articles from The Conversation’s archives.The Conversation

Jeff Inglis, Politics + Society Editor, The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.