In a week marked by controversial executive orders, legal bombshells, and a string of provocative social media posts, President Donald Trump has once again placed the United States—and the world—on edge. His actions and rhetoric, spanning from labor policy to military posturing, have ignited fierce debate over the direction of the country and the expanding powers of the presidency in 2025.
On September 5, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order renaming the Department of Defense as the Department of War, a move that instantly drew the attention of political observers and historians alike. According to The Nation, both Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth acknowledged during the signing that the United States hasn’t won a major war since World War II. Hegseth stated, “From the Department of War to the Department of Defense in 1947. We haven’t won a major war since…whether it’s the Korean War or the Vietnam War, or our generation of Iraq and Afghanistan.” Trump echoed this sentiment, lamenting that the nation has not “fought to win” since the 1940s.
This symbolic name change is more than mere semantics. It reflects a broader shift in the administration’s approach to military and domestic policy, one that critics argue is both aggressive and authoritarian. Just days after the executive order, Trump posted an AI-generated image to Truth Social—his own platform—referencing the infamous film Apocalypse Now. In the doctored image, Trump’s face is superimposed on the character of Lt. Col. Kilgore, helicopters looming over a burning city. The caption read, “I love the smell of deportations in the morning…”—a not-so-subtle nod to his threats of deploying the National Guard to Chicago as part of a sweeping immigration crackdown. “Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” the post continued.
Pressed by reporters about whether this signaled an actual military campaign against Chicago, Trump downplayed the post, saying he was not going to “war” with the city but simply working to “clean up our cities.” Yet, as The Nation notes, this official line stands in stark contrast to the raw, martial bravado of his online persona—a persona many of his supporters view as refreshingly direct and many of his critics see as deeply disturbing.
Local leaders did not mince words in response. Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson condemned Trump’s militarization of immigration enforcement, accusing him of creating a “personal militarized force.” Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker went further, describing Trump as a “wannabe dictator.” Such rhetoric, once rare in American politics, has become increasingly commonplace as Trump’s policies and pronouncements veer into uncharted territory.
Meanwhile, Trump’s assertive use of military power has not been limited to threats at home. On September 2, 2025, the U.S. military bombed a Venezuelan speedboat, allegedly involved in drug trafficking, killing 11 people. The White House offered only the thinnest of legal justifications for the strike, a move The Nation suggests may have violated international law. Congressional leaders, including Democrats Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, remained silent on the issue, highlighting what some observers see as a troubling abdication of oversight in matters of war and peace.
Further revelations have only fueled concerns about the unchecked nature of executive power. On September 8, The Nation reported that in 2019, Trump ordered a secret Navy SEAL mission into North Korea to plant a listening device. The operation went awry, resulting in the deaths of two or three civilians—fishermen who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. This covert incursion was never disclosed to Congress at the time; the Biden administration only informed select lawmakers in 2021, and the public learned of it years later.
These incidents are not isolated. They form part of a pattern that, according to InsideSources.com, reflects an administration increasingly willing to bypass legal norms and democratic checks in pursuit of its goals. On August 19, a Republican-appointed panel on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the structure of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was likely unconstitutional, siding with Elon Musk’s SpaceX and two other companies. In the aftermath, Trump fired NLRB chair Gwynne Wilcox—an action described as illegal—leaving the board without a quorum and effectively powerless to protect workers’ rights.
In August, Trump canceled union contracts for 400,000 federal workers, a move unprecedented in modern American history. His support for anti-union tactics is well documented; last year, he praised Elon Musk for threatening to fire workers who considered striking, declaring, “You’re the greatest.” These actions, critics argue, echo the anti-labor offensive launched by Ronald Reagan in 1981, when he fired 11,000 striking air traffic controllers—a watershed moment in the decline of union power.
The economic consequences of these policies are profound. While advances in artificial intelligence promise to boost productivity, there is growing skepticism about who will reap the benefits. From 1948 to 1979, productivity in the United States rose by 122%, and worker compensation kept pace, increasing by 95%. But from 1979 to 2025, productivity grew by 86%, while hourly pay for typical workers rose just 32%. As InsideSources.com points out, this decoupling of productivity and wages has fueled inequality and left many Americans feeling left behind.
Trump’s broader economic agenda has compounded these anxieties. His “One Big Beautiful Bill” includes measures that would strip Medicaid from over 11 million people, cut food assistance for 22 million, and impose tariffs that cost working families thousands of dollars annually—all while slashing taxes for the wealthiest Americans. Critics contend that these policies, combined with the weakening of labor protections, threaten to further erode the social safety net and concentrate wealth at the top.
Monetary policy has not escaped the administration’s heavy hand. Trump has repeatedly attempted to bully Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell, resorting to public insults and pressure tactics. Most recently, he has sought to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook—an action widely considered illegal. As InsideSources.com observes, this pattern of “lawfare” and political persecution only adds to fears about the administration’s willingness to bend or break the rules in pursuit of its objectives.
Perhaps most alarming to some is the rhetoric emanating from the Oval Office itself. On August 25, when asked about his military takeover of Washington, Trump offered a chilling confirmation of many critics’ worst fears: “A lot of people are saying maybe we’d like a dictator,” he said. This offhand remark, delivered in the nation’s most hallowed seat of power, sent shockwaves through political circles and underscored the stakes of the current moment.
As the Trump administration forges ahead with its bold—and, in the eyes of many, perilous—agenda, the nation stands at a crossroads. The choices made in the coming months will reverberate for years, shaping not only the future of American democracy but also its role in a rapidly changing world.
