The vice president for research at Freedom House, an organization predominantly funded by U.S. taxpayers via the State Department, participated in a panel discussion leading up to the 2024 presidential election. During the event, he accused former President Donald Trump of advocating a “dangerous” ideology that “presumes a degree of violence,” drawing a comparison between Trump and Vladimir Putin.
This online panel was uncovered by an organization dedicated to online freedom. Notably, the poll mentioned was conducted just a couple of months before the 2024 presidential election, which some analyses suggested Trump might win.
The panel’s theme was “Is democracy a democratic form of government?” and was hosted by Georgetown University. The discussion revolved around the achievements of populist parties and leaders globally.
Freedom House has roots dating back to 1941, founded by figures like Eleanor Roosevelt and Wendell Willkie, and has received federal support for most of its operations. It received $80 million in taxpayer money in 2024 alone.
In 2025, USAID had to halt many of its global activities due to funding freezes instigated by the Trump administration.
Nevertheless, in 2024, Freedom House maintained a strong presence, with Adrian Shahbaz actively criticizing Trump’s political stance.
Shahbaz articulated the concept of reclaiming power, whether against billionaires, international bodies like the UN, or marginalized groups. He suggested that a conspiracy exists among various parties that work to diminish the majority’s influence. He noted the emergence of leaders like Hungarian Viktor Orbán and India’s Modi as part of this narrative, stressing how Trump’s sentiments echoed those embraced by Putin and right-wing audiences worldwide.
Shahbaz labeled Trump’s ideology as “dangerous” and potentially violent towards minorities, stating that America is facing “democratic backsliding.” This term aligns with how Freedom House describes other nations with strong populist movements, including Hungary and Brazil.
He remarked, “That ideology is quite dangerous. It assumes a certain level of violence against others and institutions.” Citing events like January 6th and election denialism, he explained that while declining democracies are uncommon, the currently observable “democratic backsliding” is genuine, particularly in the U.S., Europe, and Brazil.
The other panelists appeared to agree with Shahbaz and continued advocating for tighter regulations on social media to combat “disinformation.” One participant pondered how one could navigate democracy in a “sewage-filled marketplace of political ideas,” claiming that governments might manage social media more effectively than tech CEOs.
“I really don’t see why figures like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg would be more reliable than Joe Biden or Merrick Garland,” reflected Ronald Krotocinski, a law professor at the University of Alabama.
