An Authoritarian Parallel: President Morgan Clark and President Donald Trump.
President Morgan Clark of the Earth Alliance in Babylon5 and U.S. President Donald Trump share a number of disturbing similarities in how they wield power. Though one is fictional and interstellar and the other real and domestic, their behavior reveals recurring authoritarian strategies: suppression of political opponents, weaponizing security forces, media domination, and erosion of constitutional norms.
1. Brutalization of Political Opponents and Detainees
Clark’s Regime
• Clark declared martial law following the Ganymede incident, dissolving the Senate and subverting the Earth Alliance Constitution.
• Under martial law, Earthforce stormed ISN (the Interstellar News Network), arresting reporters and freezing out dissenting voices.
• Political prisoners and dissenters — including reporters, military officers and senators — faced detention without due process; Clark’s forces used intimidation and violence. (While Babylon5 canon does not always give full transcripts of torture, the regime’s ruthlessness and extra constitutional detentions are well attested.)
Trump’s Regime
• Trump’s administration struck a deal with El Salvador: in March 2025, over 260 individuals (many with unclear criminal charges) were deported to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT).
• According to reporting, for some deported individuals, “neither the U.S. nor Salvadoran governments offered any immediate evidence that those deported had been charged with crimes” before their transfer.
• This use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify sending people to foreign prisons raises serious civil liberties, due-process, and human-rights concerns.
• Trump has called for the prosecution of elected officials opposed to his tyranny and most recently even called for the execution of a number of his political opponents.
In both regimes, political or perceived “threat” populations are subject to extralegal or semi legal detention, with limited protections and severe consequences.
________________________________________
2. Militarization, Martial Law, and Threats to Civil Governance
Clark’s Regime
• Clark’s declaration of martial law was total: he dissolved the Earth Alliance Senate, centralized power, and used Earthforce to enforce his rule.
• When Mars refused to comply with martial law, Clark ordered the bombing of civilian targets on Mars.
• He created the Nightwatch, a secret internal surveillance force that spied on civilians, officials, and dissenting military officers. Those identified as disloyal were vulnerable to arrest.
Trump’s Regime
Trump has deployed ederal troops/National Guard to U.S. cities, even against the objections of state governors.
• On September 2, 2025, he declared, “We’re going in” to Chicago, deploying Guard forces despite opposition from Illinois’s Governor J.B. Pritzker.
• He has floated invocation of the Insurrection Act to use active-duty troops for domestic enforcement.
• In a speech to military leaders, Trump described a “war from within,” saying dangerous U.S. cities could serve as “training grounds for our military” because “they don’t wear uniforms.”
• He also posted a parody image labeled “Chipocalypse Now”, evoking militaristic imagery over cities: helicopters, war zone visuals, and narratives of force.
These actions echo Clark’s use of martial law and his militarized suppression of dissent, substituting civilian governance with executive-controlled force.
________________________________________
3. Media Control, Suppression of Journalists, and Press Intimidation
Clark’s Regime
• Journalists who resisted were treated as enemies of the state, undermining independent reporting and silencing institutional oversight.
• Clark nationalized the media: ISN was taken over, and journalists were jailed, some even killed, for covering dissent.
Trump’s Regime
• Trump has openly threatened to revoke broadcast licenses of networks he views as hostile.
• In September 2025, he suggested that media outlets that are “against” him should have licenses taken away. “They’re licensed … I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” he said.
• He has also attacked individual journalists, questioned their legitimacy and suggested they should be jailed.
• The Pentagon, under his administration, instituted a policy requiring journalists covering the military to sign a pledge not to gather unauthorized information, even unclassified material; violation could cost them press credentials.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14290 (May 1, 2025), cutting federal funding for NPR and PBS, citing alleged bias.
In both regimes, control of the narrative—by silencing, intimidating, or punishing media critics—is central to consolidating power.
________________________________________
4. Institutional Capture: Loyalty over Constitutional Order
Clark’s Regime
• Clark placed loyalists in Earthforce who were willing to violate the Earth Alliance Constitution to carry out his directives.
• This effectively made the military an instrument of his personal rule, rather than a constitutional check on power.
Trump’s Regime
• Trump removed several top military officials and replaced them with figures viewed as personally loyal. (Media and analysts have raised concern that the Sec. of Defense is prioritizing loyalty to the administration over constitutional norms.)
• His rhetoric to the military—about “enemy within” and cities as training grounds—suggests he expects the armed forces to carry out politically motivated tasks.
This mirrors Clark’s strategy of stacking key institutions with loyalists to do his bidding, in defiance of independent oversight.
________________________________________
5. Domestic Surveillance, Spying, and Dissent Suppression
Clark’s Regime
• Through the Nightwatch, Clark’s government spied on civilians, public officials, and military officers, identifying and later detaining those deemed disloyal.
• This allowed preemptive crackdowns on dissent, limiting public challenge to his authority.
Trump’s Regime
• The Department of Justice (DOJ) has reportedly investigated individuals perceived as disloyal or critical of his administration. (While not necessarily via an official clandestine bureau like the Nightwatch, critics argue this functions similarly: dissent is surveilled and targeted.)
• Furthermore, by framing domestic critics as part of an “invasion from within,” he legitimizes surveillance and intervention against his political opposition.
Both regimes institute or encourage systems that treat dissent itself as a threat, enabling repression and preemptive punishment.
________________________________________
6. Targeting Minorities, Ethnic Groups, and “Alien” Others
Clark’s Regime
• In Babylon5, Clark’s Earth Alliance policed interactions with alien species through suspicion and militarization. He used crises as justification for crackdowns, employing Earthforce to exert dominance and control.
• His propaganda framed alien races as existential threats to humanity or Earth’s sovereignty, using fear to rally public support.
Trump’s Regine
• Trump’s rhetoric and policies again echo this: he has disparaged immigrants from what he called “shithole countries” — referring to nations in Africa and Latin America.
• His administration’s immigration and deportation strategies (e.g., the El Salvador deal) disproportionately affect non-white, marginalized populations, recasting them as national security threats or burdens.
• The militaristic language (“invasion from within”) treats segments of the civilian population – particularly immigrants and political dissidents – as foreign enemies, echoing Clark’s us-versus-them framing.
This parallel shows how both leaders weaponize identity — whether alien species in Clark’s case, or immigrants/minorities in Trump’s — to justify repression.
________________________________________
7. Manipulating Legal and Constitutional Norms
Clark’s Regime
• Clark’s martial law effectively nullified constitutional safeguards; he bypassed democratic institutions and concentrated power in the executive.
• His actions violated the Earth Alliance Constitution, yet he acted with impunity, backed by military force.
Trump’s Regime
• Trump has repeatedly challenged constitutional limits, particularly via threats to use military force in U.S. cities.
• Congressional record and legal observers note that his use of military and federal force is “unprecedented” and potentially unconstitutional.
• He has attacked independent regulatory agencies (e.g., the FCC), seeking to reshape or pressure them to serve his political ends.
Both leaders show a willingness to erode legal constraints when institutions stand in the way of their authority.
________________________________________
Conclusion
Morgan Clark and Donald Trump share a number of deeply troubling authoritarian strategies:
1. They detain perceived threats with limited regard for due process.
2. They militarize internal governance — deploying loyal forces, suspending civil liberties, and treating dissent as an existential threat.
3. They exert control over the media, threatening licenses, punishing disfavored reporters, and curbing press freedom.
4. They stack institutions with loyalists who prioritize their personal rule over constitutional governance.
5. They surveil dissent, casting political opposition or marginalized communities as enemies.
6. They manipulate legal frameworks to entrench power, bypassing democratic checks when inconvenient.
Though one regime is fictional, the patterns are remarkably analogous — suggesting that when a leader prizes loyalty over the rule of law, similar forms of authoritarian control can emerge across very different contexts.
(c) 2025. Becky Romero.
The author grants permission for her op-ed to be republished (only in full) in print or on the internet, with attribution and a link to BeckyRomero.com
1. Brutalization of Political Opponents and Detainees
Clark’s Regime
• Clark declared martial law following the Ganymede incident, dissolving the Senate and subverting the Earth Alliance Constitution.
• Under martial law, Earthforce stormed ISN (the Interstellar News Network), arresting reporters and freezing out dissenting voices.
• Political prisoners and dissenters — including reporters, military officers and senators — faced detention without due process; Clark’s forces used intimidation and violence. (While Babylon5 canon does not always give full transcripts of torture, the regime’s ruthlessness and extra constitutional detentions are well attested.)
Trump’s Regime
• Trump’s administration struck a deal with El Salvador: in March 2025, over 260 individuals (many with unclear criminal charges) were deported to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT).
• According to reporting, for some deported individuals, “neither the U.S. nor Salvadoran governments offered any immediate evidence that those deported had been charged with crimes” before their transfer.
• This use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify sending people to foreign prisons raises serious civil liberties, due-process, and human-rights concerns.
• Trump has called for the prosecution of elected officials opposed to his tyranny and most recently even called for the execution of a number of his political opponents.
In both regimes, political or perceived “threat” populations are subject to extralegal or semi legal detention, with limited protections and severe consequences.
________________________________________
2. Militarization, Martial Law, and Threats to Civil Governance
Clark’s Regime
• Clark’s declaration of martial law was total: he dissolved the Earth Alliance Senate, centralized power, and used Earthforce to enforce his rule.
• When Mars refused to comply with martial law, Clark ordered the bombing of civilian targets on Mars.
• He created the Nightwatch, a secret internal surveillance force that spied on civilians, officials, and dissenting military officers. Those identified as disloyal were vulnerable to arrest.
Trump’s Regime
Trump has deployed ederal troops/National Guard to U.S. cities, even against the objections of state governors.
• On September 2, 2025, he declared, “We’re going in” to Chicago, deploying Guard forces despite opposition from Illinois’s Governor J.B. Pritzker.
• He has floated invocation of the Insurrection Act to use active-duty troops for domestic enforcement.
• In a speech to military leaders, Trump described a “war from within,” saying dangerous U.S. cities could serve as “training grounds for our military” because “they don’t wear uniforms.”
• He also posted a parody image labeled “Chipocalypse Now”, evoking militaristic imagery over cities: helicopters, war zone visuals, and narratives of force.
These actions echo Clark’s use of martial law and his militarized suppression of dissent, substituting civilian governance with executive-controlled force.
________________________________________
3. Media Control, Suppression of Journalists, and Press Intimidation
Clark’s Regime
• Journalists who resisted were treated as enemies of the state, undermining independent reporting and silencing institutional oversight.
• Clark nationalized the media: ISN was taken over, and journalists were jailed, some even killed, for covering dissent.
Trump’s Regime
• Trump has openly threatened to revoke broadcast licenses of networks he views as hostile.
• In September 2025, he suggested that media outlets that are “against” him should have licenses taken away. “They’re licensed … I would think maybe their license should be taken away,” he said.
• He has also attacked individual journalists, questioned their legitimacy and suggested they should be jailed.
• The Pentagon, under his administration, instituted a policy requiring journalists covering the military to sign a pledge not to gather unauthorized information, even unclassified material; violation could cost them press credentials.
• Trump signed Executive Order 14290 (May 1, 2025), cutting federal funding for NPR and PBS, citing alleged bias.
In both regimes, control of the narrative—by silencing, intimidating, or punishing media critics—is central to consolidating power.
________________________________________
4. Institutional Capture: Loyalty over Constitutional Order
Clark’s Regime
• Clark placed loyalists in Earthforce who were willing to violate the Earth Alliance Constitution to carry out his directives.
• This effectively made the military an instrument of his personal rule, rather than a constitutional check on power.
Trump’s Regime
• Trump removed several top military officials and replaced them with figures viewed as personally loyal. (Media and analysts have raised concern that the Sec. of Defense is prioritizing loyalty to the administration over constitutional norms.)
• His rhetoric to the military—about “enemy within” and cities as training grounds—suggests he expects the armed forces to carry out politically motivated tasks.
This mirrors Clark’s strategy of stacking key institutions with loyalists to do his bidding, in defiance of independent oversight.
________________________________________
5. Domestic Surveillance, Spying, and Dissent Suppression
Clark’s Regime
• Through the Nightwatch, Clark’s government spied on civilians, public officials, and military officers, identifying and later detaining those deemed disloyal.
• This allowed preemptive crackdowns on dissent, limiting public challenge to his authority.
Trump’s Regime
• The Department of Justice (DOJ) has reportedly investigated individuals perceived as disloyal or critical of his administration. (While not necessarily via an official clandestine bureau like the Nightwatch, critics argue this functions similarly: dissent is surveilled and targeted.)
• Furthermore, by framing domestic critics as part of an “invasion from within,” he legitimizes surveillance and intervention against his political opposition.
Both regimes institute or encourage systems that treat dissent itself as a threat, enabling repression and preemptive punishment.
________________________________________
6. Targeting Minorities, Ethnic Groups, and “Alien” Others
Clark’s Regime
• In Babylon5, Clark’s Earth Alliance policed interactions with alien species through suspicion and militarization. He used crises as justification for crackdowns, employing Earthforce to exert dominance and control.
• His propaganda framed alien races as existential threats to humanity or Earth’s sovereignty, using fear to rally public support.
Trump’s Regine
• Trump’s rhetoric and policies again echo this: he has disparaged immigrants from what he called “shithole countries” — referring to nations in Africa and Latin America.
• His administration’s immigration and deportation strategies (e.g., the El Salvador deal) disproportionately affect non-white, marginalized populations, recasting them as national security threats or burdens.
• The militaristic language (“invasion from within”) treats segments of the civilian population – particularly immigrants and political dissidents – as foreign enemies, echoing Clark’s us-versus-them framing.
This parallel shows how both leaders weaponize identity — whether alien species in Clark’s case, or immigrants/minorities in Trump’s — to justify repression.
________________________________________
7. Manipulating Legal and Constitutional Norms
Clark’s Regime
• Clark’s martial law effectively nullified constitutional safeguards; he bypassed democratic institutions and concentrated power in the executive.
• His actions violated the Earth Alliance Constitution, yet he acted with impunity, backed by military force.
Trump’s Regime
• Trump has repeatedly challenged constitutional limits, particularly via threats to use military force in U.S. cities.
• Congressional record and legal observers note that his use of military and federal force is “unprecedented” and potentially unconstitutional.
• He has attacked independent regulatory agencies (e.g., the FCC), seeking to reshape or pressure them to serve his political ends.
Both leaders show a willingness to erode legal constraints when institutions stand in the way of their authority.
________________________________________
Conclusion
Morgan Clark and Donald Trump share a number of deeply troubling authoritarian strategies:
1. They detain perceived threats with limited regard for due process.
2. They militarize internal governance — deploying loyal forces, suspending civil liberties, and treating dissent as an existential threat.
3. They exert control over the media, threatening licenses, punishing disfavored reporters, and curbing press freedom.
4. They stack institutions with loyalists who prioritize their personal rule over constitutional governance.
5. They surveil dissent, casting political opposition or marginalized communities as enemies.
6. They manipulate legal frameworks to entrench power, bypassing democratic checks when inconvenient.
Though one regime is fictional, the patterns are remarkably analogous — suggesting that when a leader prizes loyalty over the rule of law, similar forms of authoritarian control can emerge across very different contexts.
(c) 2025. Becky Romero.
The author grants permission for her op-ed to be republished (only in full) in print or on the internet, with attribution and a link to BeckyRomero.com
36-40, F
