On July 4, 1776, the thirteen colonies that had risen against the British Empire jointly signed the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America. That new nation, with the will to be freer, more equal, and more just, detached itself from subordination to London to embark on its own path that aimed to be exemplary. The Constitution adopted a few years later sought to give legal form to that promise, establishing a government subject to norms and controls.
Two hundred and fifty years later, the United States bears no resemblance to what its founders promised. It is enough to observe the moment when the anniversary arrives, amidst the celebration of a World Cup conditioned by immigration bans, a systematic persecution of immigrants who are criminalized and deported without guarantees, the deployment of military personnel in cities governed by the opposition and against the will of their authorities, a fragile memorandum with Iran that barely extends a ceasefire and is passed off as a beneficial peace agreement, and the presidential attempt, halted at the last moment by the Supreme Court, to abolish birthright citizenship.
In addition, there is the pardon of the Capitol rioters, pressures on media and universities, and the use of state resources against political opponents. These are just some examples of the explicit abandonment of the principles on which the country was founded and the concentration of unchecked power.
The United States was built on the separation of powers and respect for the courts, the idea that power is exercised within limits and that belonging to the political community does not depend on the discretion of the ruler. Its founders, fervent opponents of the tyranny characteristic of much of the European monarchies of their time, wanted an Executive subject to the law and courts capable of controlling it. And, underlying all this, was the conviction that all men are created equal and that belonging to the nation is not inherited by blood or lineage, but is acquired by joining a common project.
This was a significant part of its prestige. The American influence was never solely based on its military or economic power. It also rested on the credibility of a republic capable of expanding rights, rectifying, and embodying an idea of freedom that many young democracies have tried to imitate over the decades.
It is advisable to avoid here the nostalgia for a golden age that never existed. The gap between the ideal and practice has been considerable from the beginning. Slavery, the extermination of indigenous peoples, segregation, or support for dictatorships and coups in Latin America and other regions of the world remind us that the United States has repeatedly failed to fulfill its foundational promises.
The difference is that, even in those episodes, the ideal continued to operate as a normative reference, as the criterion by which its own practice was measured and corrected. Those practices betrayed the ideal, although without completely nullifying it as a shared aspiration. What is relevant now is that it is being deliberately and explicitly renounced.
That is the crux of the matter. Donald Trump does not simply defend questionable policies; he governs against the principles on which his country was founded. He empties them of content while constantly appealing to patriotism and national symbols. Two hundred and fifty years after that declaration, the main threat to the project that defined the United States comes today from its own presidency.
