The letter titled “Duped again?” about the No Kings rally in Park City presents a deeply misleading portrait of the protest movement while downplaying the growing threat of authoritarianism in the United States — a threat personified by Donald Trump. Rather than engage with facts or history, the author relies on inflammatory language, selective reporting, and ideological distortion. Let’s set the record straight.
1. Misrepresentation of Protest Violence
The author invokes a tragic incident at a Salt Lake City rally to paint the broader movement as chaotic and dangerous. But even the sources cited — The Guardian, Fox 13, and the Salt Lake Police Department — confirm that the demonstration was overwhelmingly peaceful with over 18,000 attendees and only one violent incident still under investigation.
There is no verified evidence that “safety marshals” acted recklessly or with malice. Yet the author leaps to conclusions and uses the tragedy as a cudgel to discredit an entire nationwide movement.
This tactic has a long and troubling history. In the 1960s, peaceful civil rights protests were often portrayed as violent by segregationist media and politicians who sought to suppress dissent by smearing protestors as dangerous agitators. What we’re seeing now is the same rhetorical move — guilt by association, rooted in fear rather than fact.
2. Demonizing Civil Movements
By drawing a line from Black Lives Matter to No Kings, the author repeats a common authoritarian trick: delegitimizing protest by branding it as foreign, radical or subversive. This is not new. Joseph McCarthy did it in the 1950s with his witch hunts for “communist sympathizers.” So did Augusto Pinochet in Chile, who labeled all political opponents as enemies of the state and used it as justification for torture and disappearances.
Both BLM and No Kings reflect long-standing American traditions of civic activism — from the abolitionists and suffragettes to labor unions and anti-war protesters. To dismiss such organizing as “AstroTurf” or “manipulated by Democratic elites” is not only inaccurate, it undermines the foundational right to peaceful assembly.
3. A Distorted Definition of Fascism
The editorial attempts a semantic sleight of hand by arguing that Trump cannot be a fascist because he promotes deregulation. This is a gross misunderstanding of fascism. Fascism is not about the size of government — it’s about the abuse of power. It’s characterized by:
- A cult of personality
- Suppression of dissent
- Nationalist propaganda
- Disdain for democratic norms
- Use of state violence to enforce political loyalty
Let’s be clear: Deregulation and tax cuts do not absolve a leader of authoritarian behavior. Mussolini privatized many state industries in 1930s Italy while simultaneously banning opposition parties and jailing critics. Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil rolled back environmental protections while attacking the press and stacking the courts. Authoritarianism is not about left or right — it’s about the centralization of power and the erosion of checks and balances.
4. Trump’s Record Mirrors Authoritarian Leaders
Consider these documented parallels between Trump and authoritarian rulers past and present:
- Undermining elections: Like Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Trump sought to delegitimize elections before the first vote was cast, spread false claims of fraud, and encouraged efforts to overturn legitimate results. His pressure on Georgia’s Secretary of State to “find votes” is akin to strongman tactics in post-Soviet states.
- Inciting violence: From encouraging supporters to “knock the crap out of” protestors to calling the Jan. 6 rioters “patriots,” Trump uses the rhetoric of political violence much like Benito Mussolini or Rodrigo Duterte, who weaponized thugs to target opponents.
- Targeting the judiciary and press: Trump’s repeated claims of “fake news,” his threats to jail journalists, and his attempts to manipulate the Justice Department reflect the tactics of authoritarian regimes from Vladimir Putin’s Russia to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey — where courts have been systematically bent to the will of the executive.
- Weaponizing nationalism: His policies targeting immigrants, the Muslim ban, and his flirtation with white nationalist talking points recall ultranationalist regimes of the past. Francisco Franco’s Spain enforced similar narratives of cultural “purity” as justification for authoritarian control.
5. What Authoritarianism Looks Like Before It’s Too Late
We often look back on authoritarian takeovers as sudden events — but most unfold incrementally. Democracies do not die overnight. They erode through:
- The normalization of anti-democratic speech
- The vilification of opposition
- The erosion of independent institutions
- The public’s growing tolerance for abuse of power
The letter mocks the slogans and concerns of protestors who warn of fascism and authoritarianism — yet history shows that by the time such warnings become universally accepted, it’s often too late. As historian Timothy Snyder warns, “post-truth is pre-fascism.”
6. Conclusion: The Real Threat Isn’t Protest — It’s Complacency
The No Kings movement is not an elitist conspiracy. It is a patriotic response to a leader who has repeatedly attempted to subvert democratic institutions, discredit opposition, and install himself above the law. To call that out is not “fear-mongering.” It is civic vigilance.
Instead of trivializing fascism with dictionary games, we should be studying how it rose in Germany, Italy, Hungary, Chile and Turkey — and noticing the alarming echoes in our own political discourse. Protest is not the threat to democracy. Silence is.
Before labeling protestors as pawns or radicals, we owe it to our history — and our future — to remember how democracies fail, and who helps them fall.
Tom McDonald
Park City