More on authoritarianism.
First read this, then look at the evidence that follows.
From my book Conservatism in America
"Authoritarianism also breeds corruption and fragility. When leaders are not accountable, when courts and the press cannot investigate freely, and when public contracts and concessions are handed out to cronies, the line between government and looting blurs. On the surface, strongmen may seem to “get things done”—build a highway, crush a strike, jail a rival—but beneath that surface institutions wither. Independent courts, civil services, professional militaries, and robust civic organizations are treated as threats rather than assets."
1. Weakening independent watchdogs.
Within days of taking office, Trump fired 17–18 inspectors general across major agencies, despite a law requiring 30 days’ notice to Congress and a specific rationale. Inspectors general are the people meant to investigate waste, fraud, and abuse inside government, so removing them in a sweep is a textbook example of reducing internal accountability.
2. Weakening the professional civil service.
Trump revived “Schedule F” and otherwise moved to strip job protections from large numbers of federal workers, making them easier to remove and replace. Reuters reported this as part of an effort to “gut the federal bureaucracy,” and unions later sued over efforts to make tens of thousands of workers easier to fire and replace with political loyalists. That maps closely onto your point about institutions withering beneath a strongman-style surface.
3. Treating the professional military as a political obstacle rather than an institution to preserve.
In February 2025, Trump fired Joint Chiefs Chairman C.Q. Brown and pushed out five other admirals and generals in what Reuters described as an “unprecedented” shake-up. Five former defense secretaries later called the firings reckless. That is a strong example about professional militaries being treated as threats rather than assets.
4. Press freedom pressured through access restrictions and licensing threats.
In February 2025, the White House restricted the Associated Press’s access to the Oval Office and Air Force One because AP kept using “Gulf of Mexico” rather than “Gulf of America.” In March 2026, a federal judge struck down a Pentagon press-access policy as unconstitutional after it threatened journalists with being labeled security risks for pursuing unauthorized information.
Also in March 2026, FCC Chair Brendan Carr warned broadcasters to “correct course” or risk losing their licenses over alleged “fake news” about the Iran war. Trump then signed an order pressing regulators to protect an exclusive TV window for the Army-Navy game by preventing other college football games from airing at the same time.
Those are unusually direct attempts to pressure or punish disfavored reporting.
5. Courts under strain from intimidation in politically charged cases.
Federal judges, as well as Chief Justice Roberts, publicly warned in March 2026 about rising threats and intimidation, including death threats and threatening “pizza deliveries” to their homes after politically sensitive rulings. That is not the same as the executive directly abolishing courts, but it does fit the point that when leaders and their ecosystems delegitimize neutral institutions, judicial independence becomes harder to sustain in practice.
6. Independent legal actors pressured through retaliation.
Reuters reported that Trump issued executive orders against major law firms that restricted access to government buildings and officials and threatened clients’ federal contracts, prompting some firms to make concessions and pledge hundreds of millions of dollars in free legal work to avoid further punishment. Reuters also found that many large firms later scaled back pro bono and public-interest work that could put them at odds with the administration. That is a concrete example of civic institutions bending under political pressure.
7. The closest current example to “cronies / blurred line between government and looting” sentence is the Musk conflict-of-interest issue.
I did not find a clean Reuters example of “public contracts handed to cronies” in the crude sense of a highway simply being gifted to a friend. I did find repeated Reuters reporting that lawmakers viewed Elon Musk’s dual role as a top Trump adviser driving federal cuts while his companies, especially SpaceX, held huge federal contracts as an “inherent conflict of interest.”
Reuters also reported that lawmakers were probing whether DOT’s ethics oversight was adequate because Musk was helping determine which contracts and programs would be cut while continuing to profit from federal business. That is the nearest recent U.S. example to your cronyism point, though I’d present it as a conflict-of-interest / patronage risk rather than a proven looting scheme.
