Autocracy? Plutocracy? Corporatocracy? Kleptocracy? Kakistocracy? Or Idiocracy?

Since the Felon-in-Chief took office, we’ve seen all of these words used to describe his new administration. So which one fits?

In fact, they all do.

To wit: An autocracy is defined as a country governed by one person with absolute power. By his own count, Trump has issued more than 300 executive orders (several of them in direct conflict with the Constitution and congressional authority). In doing so, Trump has signaled that he intends to consolidate power in the executive branch. Those orders, if they are allowed to stand, combined with his intent to replace more than ten thousand nonpartisan civil servants with Trump loyalists and last year’s SCOTUS decision giving him immunity for most executive actions, will clearly allow Trump to operate as an autocrat – a king.

A plutocracy is a government ruled by or controlled by the wealthy. Although the description of the United States as a plutocracy is nothing new (scholars have determined that the US could best be described as a plutocracy since 2014), the Trump regime seems determined to expand the power and influence of the wealthy. Trump himself claims to be a billionaire and many of his nominees and appointees are billionaires. Moreover, three of the world’s richest men were front and center at his inauguration. And, he has already created a new department (DOGE) for the world’s richest man. Of course, Trump has clearly stated that he intends to give these people further tax cuts.

A corporatocracy is a government controlled or influenced by business. Certainly, the consolidation of control over entire industries by a few corporations has been underway since the Reagan era. For example, the grain industry is controlled by 4 multinationals. The meat industry is controlled by 4 giant corporations. The packaged food industry is controlled by 10. The pharmaceutical industry is controlled by 3. And the news and entertainment media are controlled by just 6 corporations, most of which have already shown a willingness to ignore Trump’s lies and bow to his wishes. Many of these corporations supported and funded Trump’s campaign. What do they expect in return? Trump has promised to reduce or eliminate many of the corporate regulations intended to protect our citizens and our environment. (Incidentally, you may be interested to learn that Benito Mussolini, the founder of fascism, once said that fascism could better be described as corporatism.)

A kleptocracy is defined as a government in which its rulers use their positions to steal from the people. Given what we saw during Trump’s first term in office, how could one argue the description won’t apply to this term? Not only did he financially benefit from overcharging his own Secret Service officers for staying in his resorts and hotels, from violating the Constitution’s emoluments clause with his Washington, D.C. hotel, from appointing his family members to positions of power within his administration, and from his son-in-law receiving a $2 billion “investment” from the Saudis. Several of his cabinet members helped themselves to taxpayer funds for private vacations on government planes along with numerous other perks. And, by firing the independent Inspectors General, Trump has made it clear that we should expect even more of this behavior in the future.

A kakistocracy is defined as a nation run by the worst, least qualified or most unscrupulous people. It’s certainly difficult to argue that the incoming administration doesn’t fit that description. Not only is Trump a convicted felon, an indicted conspirator in the January 6 insurrection, the owner of a company convicted of tax fraud, an adjudicated sexual assaulter, and an accused rapist. Many of his nominees have also faced legal problems. And many more are obviously unqualified for their respective positions. Indeed, the only qualification that seems to matter is a willingness to kiss the king’s butt…err…ring.

Finally, as it sounds, an idiocracy is a society run by idiots. I’ll leave it to you to decide if the term now fits the United States.

Sadly, I fear the one definition that will no longer apply is democracy.