Debate Over Trump’s Authoritarian Label on Wikipedia

Is former President Donald Trump truly an authoritarian? In the past year, a group of partisan Wikipedia editors has made this assertion in various articles. These editors have leaned heavily on the same sources, using direct quotes to weave this controversial claim throughout Wikipedia. This has, in some instances, turned articles into something that resembles a chatbot’s output, citing vague “proof” of Trump’s authoritarianism.

One key article, focused on Trump, mentions the term “authoritarian” more than seven times as of early October. Notably, the lead section states that the actions of this former president can actually undermine democratic structures. Yet, it avoids naming anyone specifically who labels Trump as authoritarian, which feels a bit like skirting the issue. In the section dubbed “Second Presidency,” it is argued that numerous legal experts and political scientists consider Trump’s actions toward civil society to be authoritarian.

This Wikipedia campaign has three primary sources backing this sweeping claim. One is from a series in the Guardian, which can lean left. The piece references Harvard political scientist Stephen Levitsky, who suggests that Trump has an unexpected authoritarian instinct. It’s worth noting that Levitsky is affiliated with Protect Democracy, a political organization, raising potential conflicts of interest.

Efforts to label Trump as an authoritarian echo earlier campaigns that referred to him as a “fascist.” Recently, a new article titled “Donald Trump and Fascism” was created, which aligns with arguments in a book called “How Democracies Die.” This book is co-authored by Levitsky.

The methodology employed by Wikipedia editors often involves creating interconnected narratives across various articles, each reinforcing a similar point. This repetitive framing serves to bolster the overall narrative.

One article titled “Targeting Political Opponents and Civil Society Under the Second Trump Administration” echoes the same assertions made in the primary Trump article, suggesting that Trump’s actions are seen as authoritarian by various experts. It cites a Guardian article again, which raises questions about the quality of sources being used.

Additionally, another Wikipedia entry on “Trumpism” uses the term “authoritarian” numerous times, framing the movement as “right-wing authoritarian populism,” lending further credence to these claims. This concept is again supported by a professor known for critiquing right-wing politics using Marxist lenses.

In another context, citations related to Trump’s perceived authoritarian behavior appear repeatedly across articles on different subjects, suggesting a concerted effort to paint a cohesive picture of Trump’s governance style.

This whole endeavor stands out starkly when compared to entries on openly authoritarian leaders, like Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei, who isn’t ever labeled as authoritarian in his Wikipedia entry. Despite the inconsistencies, the narrative that Trump is authoritarian seems to perpetuate easily through online platforms.

When AI tools are asked about Trump, they often affirm the authoritarian label, referencing these Wikipedia articles as evidence, showing how easily public opinion can be shaped by persistent narratives.

Wikipedia has long proclaimed its commitment to neutrality and crowdsourced information. Yet, as illustrated, it’s surprisingly simple for biased editors to distort this ideal. The real challenge is discerning factual information in a space influenced by subjectivity.