The various factions united under Trump lack a cohesive ideology. Their single common thread is opposition to progressivism. When that external threat recedes, their internal disagreements, such as on foreign interventionism, cause the coalition to fracture.

The strengthening diplomatic, economic, and military ties between Russia and China since the Ukraine invasion have created a powerful "axis of authoritarianism." This bloc, combining China's economic might with Russia's resources, represents a formidable and unified adversary to the US and Europe.

The conflict is not just regional but a proxy war between two ideologies: Western democracies versus an alliance of totalitarian states (Russia, Iran, North Korea, China). Non-aligned nations like India and Brazil are watching to see which system proves more resilient before choosing a side.

The analysis posits that the strengthening diplomatic, economic, and military alliance between Russia and China post-Ukraine invasion is not just another event, but the single most significant global power realignment in ten years. This partnership of two nuclear-armed major powers creates a formidable bloc.

Dictatorships can tolerate individual criticism but actively suppress mechanisms that create common knowledge, like public assemblies or organized online groups. They understand that power rests on preventing citizens from realizing that their grievances are shared. Once dissent becomes common knowledge, coordinated revolt is possible, which no regime can withstand.

Internally divided societies rarely come together on their own. Unity is almost exclusively forged when a common external, existential threat emerges. This was seen after 9/11 and during the Cold War, where the fear of an outside enemy overshadowed internal political disagreements, forcing cooperation.

For a dictator, concepts like free speech and rule of law are an existential threat that can ignite street revolutions. This is why Russia invaded Ukraine: to crush a neighboring democratic movement before its contagious ideas could spread.

The USSR's relatively peaceful end was possible because many elites wanted to join the West. This created an internal pull towards capitulation. In contrast, regimes in China and Iran are built on anti-Western ideologies, making their elites far less likely to be co-opted and their regimes much harder to influence or change.

Even if Iran's theocracy falls, a Western-style liberal democracy is unlikely. The leading opposition factions, particularly the royalists, are themselves illiberal and exhibit authoritarian tendencies. The most optimistic outcome may be a state resembling Hungary or a MAGA-led America, not a truly free society.