"The Enemies From Within"

Are we in America or Russia?

National Guard troops were deployed to the Lincoln Memorial on June 2, 2020, during protests held in Washington, DC, over the death of George Floyd. Martha Raddatz/STR/Latin America News Agency/Reuters

Trump: “We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia, and all these countries.”

Donald Trump's recent rhetoric—especially his labeling of political opponents as "enemies from within" and his threats to use the military against them—is deeply disturbing and straight out of an authoritarian playbook. Despite almost a decade of this, it’s hard to comprehend that such language is being used in America. This tactic mirrors the strategies employed by Russia for decades, both during the Soviet era and under Putin’s rule, to silence and demonize any opposition. It's horrifying to watch this rhetoric in our political discourse, and I am yet again warning about the danger Trump poses for the future of our democracy. This language is not just a sign of aggressive political posturing; it reflects a dangerous playbook that autocrats use to delegitimize opposition, sow fear, and consolidate power. The implications for American democracy are serious, and the parallels between Trump's rhetoric and the authoritarian strategies employed by Putin are striking and alarming.

One of the most chilling aspects of Trump’s language is his tendency to cast political rivals as existential threats and traitors to the nation. By labeling people like Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi as “enemies from within,” Trump is not just engaging in hyperbole; he is employing a tactic that has long been a hallmark of autocratic regimes.

Trump: “These are bad people. We have a lot of bad people. But when you look at ‘Shifty Schiff’ and some of the others, yeah, they are, to me, the enemy from within”

This is reminiscent of Soviet practices where dissenters were often labeled as enemies of the people. The Soviet Union, particularly under leaders like Brezhnev, made a practice of silencing opposition through a combination of character assassination and legal repression. Anyone who dared to criticize the system was not merely a political opponent but was often painted as a traitor or mentally ill.

Trump's suggestion that people who don’t vote for him "need to have their head examined" is disturbingly similar to the Soviet practice of pathologizing dissent. During the Soviet era, dissidents were frequently imprisoned in psychiatric institutions, the implication being that anyone who opposed the regime must be mentally unstable. While Trump has not called for psychiatric detention, the insinuation that opposition is a sign of irrationality or mental illness is a clear attempt to undermine the legitimacy of political dissent. His rhetoric continues to fuel a toxic political climate in which disagreement is no longer seen as a necessary part of democratic discourse but as something dangerous and unpatriotic.

Moreover, Trump’s attacks on the media as the "enemy of the people" are another clear parallel to the strategies used by both the Soviet Union and Putin’s Russia to suppress speech. The phrase "enemy of the people" has deep historical roots in authoritarianism, most notably in Stalin’s Russia, where it was used to justify purges, imprisonments, and executions of those who were deemed threats to the regime. In modern Russia, Putin continued this tradition by systematically dismantling independent media outlets and using state-run media to promote his propaganda while discrediting critics. By labeling the media as an adversary, Trump is attempting to erode one of the fundamental pillars of democracy—a free and independent press that holds power to account.

Trump’s willingness to use the state to target his opponents has been on display. As we have seen, this is not mere hyperbole; he employed these tactics during his time in office but was often restrained by those around him. During the Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, he threatened to deploy military forces to suppress demonstrations, and in a speech from the Rose Garden—while tear gas was fired at protesters outside the White House, he said “As we speak, I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel, and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults, and the wanton destruction of property.”

Trump's militarized response to protests, particularly his inquiry about shooting protestors—as revealed by former Defense Secretary Mark Esper—revealed a troubling willingness to use state violence against dissent. This approach echoes Putin's tactics in Russia, where security forces routinely suppress opposition. In 2020, Trump's deployment of paramilitary units without identification during protests served as a chilling reminder of these authoritarian practices. The sight of heavily armed federal agents in D.C. and agents in Portland detaining protesters in unmarked vehicles mirrored the tactics used by regimes that confront dissent with intimidation and force. Such actions aim to instill fear in those who dare to speak out, underscoring the lengths to which Trump would go to silence his critics. Should Trump return to power this time, he will surround himself with loyalists who will execute his demands without hesitation.

Trump’s admiration for autocrats like Putin, combined with his authoritarian rhetoric and actions, should alarm anyone who values democratic principles. The United States is not Russia—its institutions are strong, its press independent, and its legal system vital to the rule of law—but the normalization of authoritarian rhetoric is a slippery slope. History has shown time and again that democracies can be undermined from within when leaders erode the norms that uphold them.

Americans must take this alarming rhetoric seriously and stay vigilant in safeguarding the democratic values that have long defined our nation. We can't afford to let Trump's authoritarian tactics take root; the consequences could extend far beyond his political ambitions. If we don’t stop this, the erosion of democratic norms could lead to a culture where dissent is criminalized, opposition is vilified, and power is wielded through fear and repression.

Honestly, I don’t think many people are prepared to live in a country like Russia, where dissent is silenced by state institutions and anyone who questions the government is labeled an enemy. That’s why it’s more crucial than ever for us to vote in this election—and to make sure everyone we know understands what is at risk and does the same.