Donald Trump has an appealing personality, and a winning brusqueness to himself. He can be funny. He is not an unintelligent man. Yet he errs when he brings the tools of the showman/businessman to the Kissingerian heights of international discourse. Why so?
Because statecraft isn’t a huckster’s paradise where you’re trying to “bluff” your way into a better deal. It just doesn’t translate. Trump may get part of what he wants, but he’s going to damage and ruin the rest to salvage a part-win. And even that little victory may be mainly due to the inherent strength of the United States, and its economic and democratic system.
America is a fine country. It is, I think it is safe to say, the greatest nation the world has ever known. It has flaws, of course, such as a private system of health care, but if you look past that, you see an artist’s imagining of the City on the Hill, shining and white, splendid and splendiferous. If you work hard in America, you can truly succeed. (If you couple this with astute brains.) There is a EDM song made before the term Electronic Dance Music was coined, and it samples a U.S. politician intoning The American Dream does not come to those who sleep. Donald Trump is the truest avatar of that profound culture. He started with a leg up, courtesy of his rich father, but he exceeded his father, making his mark first in superior Manhattan real estate and then in the larger venues of national politics. But Trump doesn’t understand himself.
One of the national flaws of Americans is their lack of introspection. They seldom consider why their nation is the greatest, only beat their chests like apes and proclaim it to the world. What is so great about Trump and America, and so tragic about it when it goes off the rails politically speaking?
Trump and America represent the TRIUMPH OF THE WILL, as celebrated by Nietzsche and picked up on by the Nazis. Trump Can Do It — and so can America. Set a man on the surface of the moon? Done. Prepare for the eventual colonization of another world in the solar system, and the eventual starship-deployment beyond that? Getting ready to do it.
But willpower is not just a creative force — it also can smash and obliterate what it doesn’t like. Trump likes to be kowtowed to. This week, the leader of Ireland is flying to the United States to talk with the Emperor. Trump likes. It is similar to when Trudeau (Turdo/Castreau/etc.) came on bended knee to Mar-a-Lago to say please, Mr. President, keep your tariffs waving far away from over our heads.
When Donald Trump flails around, flip-flopping on his demands and his very targets, he sees this as a symbol of strength. I see it as a symbol of a disorganized mind, fighting to right itself on the waves of conscious symbolism. Some men are brilliant elitists with big brains — they get lost in the ravines of jungleland where poisonous vines dwell to heave big rocks over their intellectual shoulders. Trump is a TV watcher. He never read a book he liked. He’s smart but more cunning than smart. America has its fair share of intellectuals, but these are never taken seriously. They’re smart in a nation that is more cunning than smart. And that helps explain Trump’s resonance with the populace and his success — his kind of IQ is more in line with his people’s than William Buckley’s ever was. (Buckley spoke in a funny, serious way. He could comment on elections, but he never could have won one. Trump is the idealized American King. He dispenses His favors with the wave of a scepter with little American flags festooned upon its golden length.)
Ronald Reagan was an actor first. He oozed his way into a suit and oozed pablum-comforting words to a warm-milk-needing nation.
Donald Trump is a seller first. He huckers his way from product to product, never really believing in them (perhaps never believing in himself), but getting you to believe in them anyway.
The Ship of State is more than an idealized TV image. It’s more than the Statue of Liberty holding her torch high in the night sky. It requires sobriety and deliberation, for the fate of whole continents is at stake on the only world we have. Donald Trump fails that test, that metric. He is a bad President and, as much as I like him personally, any man who does not love to ingest the written word cannot serve as leader in the long knowledge age we have entered since the Industrial Revolution began.
Dark Sport 
he’s certainly made an impact in Australia now he is announced that we are getting no tariff relief; I don’t think we ever were but our PM led us to believe we would be specially favoured; an election coming up —
LikeLike
I just don’t understand how he can hate AUSTRALIA, of all places. It is a pro-American stalwart country that isn’t the biggest kid on the block; taking the gloves to Oz is like beating up on the crippled kid in the playground just because he’s blocking part of your sunlight. If you have a problem with him, MOVE TO ANOTHER AREA.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brilliantly said, Greg ! good on you !
LikeLike
With 4 more years of his term of office left to run, there’s no end to the mischief Trump can get up to. The Stock Market is already suffering, U.S. auto companies and liquor companies are begging for a change in course, and Republican Senators are doubting his Canadian annexation talk. All this for what? A photo op and a good sound bite on Fox News? It hardly seems worth it.
LikeLike
It takes a long time for a liking for Trump to fade away. In my case, my disillusionment came with some of the nonsense Trump was saying about the U.S. “owning” the Gaza Strip. That’s some serious class-A craziness right there. If America wants to turn into a global conqueror, that’s one thing. That’s a project I’d like to see. But if Trump is just running his mouth to hear the dogs bay after him on the streets of Washington, what’s the point in that??
LikeLike
I completely agree with you on Trump. He lacks the depth and deliberation necessary for true statecraft, and his erratic approach to leadership feels more like a gambler playing high-stakes poker than a leader guiding a nation. But at the same time, I don’t think being an intellectual necessarily makes a great leader either.
Take Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC) in Brazil as an example. He is still regarded as a brilliant intellectual, one of the most respected minds in Latin America. He developed Dependency Theory, among other works, and to this day, many people miss him — probably because he was the last Brazilian president who could actually speak another language fluently.
His government did brought stability through the Plano Real, which helped control inflation, but it also increased inequality, privatized key industries, and laid the groundwork for economic struggles that persisted long after he left office.
Then came Lula, who was the complete opposite — a former metalworker and union leader, missing a finger from a factory accident, with no formal higher education. His Portuguese is full of grammatical mistakes, and the elite in Brazil hated him for it, calling him a drunkard (cachaceiro) and mocking his working-class background. And yet, he was the president who opened the most universities in Brazil’s history, investing heavily in education alongside Dilma Rousseff, his successor.
But here’s the catch: there was no long-term economic planning to create jobs for all these new graduates. Lula and Dilma expanded access to education but didn’t invest in industrialization or long-term employment strategies. And Dilma? Another intellectual, highly educated, well-read, and yet she led one of the most disastrous governments in Brazil’s history — so bad that she was impeached.
Now Lula is back, but this government is nothing like his first two terms. He’s not making bold changes; he’s bying time, trying to keep Bolsonaro from returning. And Bolsonaro? He’s like Trump: a complete idiot who actively despises intellectualism, despite pretending otherwise. His government removed philosophy and sociology from school curriculums, pushing a focus only on math and Portuguese — a terrible move, in my opinion.
Our only saving grace was that he was too incompetent (or too compromised by more powerful figures) to fully execute his authoritarian ambitions.
Still, I don’t think this stability will last long. We have elections next year, and I hope Lula wins again just to buy us more time, but I have no illusions that he will be the same leader he was in the past. I’m deeply pessimistic about the future, especially in politics.
As for your point about Reagan, that was an interesting connection. Reagan was more of a showman than Trump, but he still had the ability to project strength, at least in the way the U.S. wanted to be perceived at the time. But I think this had more to do with America’s position in the 1980s rather than Reagan himself. He got lucky — he came in when the USSR was already on its last legs and managed to claim credit for its collapse, when in reality, it was a combination of factors (yes, Reagan and Thatcher played a role, but they weren’t the only or even the main reason).
Trump, on the other hand, is operating in a completely different world. The U.S. is still immensely powerful, both economically and militarily, but the illusion of invulnerability is fading. This tariff war they’re engaged in? It’s going to backfire. They thought intellectual labor alone would keep them on top, but they neglected their own country’s infrastructure, let their industries move overseas, and turned into a service-based economy. Just look at their railway system — it’s a joke compared to Europe, China, or even Japan.
But honestly, I can’t say much either. If American trains are a joke, Brazilian trains are a tragedy. Every state here uses a different track gauge, making railway integration nearly impossible. It’s a mess. But I love trains — I think they’re one of the best indicators of how an economy values transportation, efficiency, and planning. It’s an incredible form of transport, and it’s a shame we don’t invest in it more.
Anyway, great article — your comparison with Reagan was an interesting angle. I just think the problem isn’t only Trump — it’s the broader decay of American political and economic strategy.
LikeLike
I read with great interest the modern-day history of Brazilian presidents. It is a shame that the newspapers here in North America ignore Latin America so flagrantly. With its 200 million citizens and first-world cities (yes, there is rampant poverty, but have you seen Detroit or Baltimore lately?) Brazil has reached the critical mass necessary to be a newsworthy center of attention — and yet it gets roundly ignored. Does anyone in North America’s middle classes know that Sao Paolo is the largest city in South America, comparable in size to New York? Does anyone know that Brazil builds its own jets and markets them successfully around the world? It’s a tragedy, really.
On another note, Reagan was an interesting president because he came from a thespian background. As a figurehead, he was consummately suited to be head of government. When the space shuttle exploded, his sorrow and demonstrable eloquence led to an epic speech that soothed the nation. Can one imagine Trump being able to perform equally well? Trump’s sojourn on reality TV leaves him little prepared to do more than bellow “You’re fired!”
No, Trump is flawed on so many levels that I cannot let my liking for him interfere with my cold, clear judgment. If he were assassinated tomorrow, and Vance took power, that would not be a tragic thing in the annals of history.
LikeLike
I agree with you in part but for a different reason. I think Trump should remove my country from the affairs of all foreign nations. No more nation building or soft power influence. I don’t think he should be negotiating peace deals or even giving aid to countries at this point. I think the U.S dollar being the world currency and U.S. military are the only real powers the U.S has.. In regards to Tariffs to Canada and other nations I am confused.
Is this the logic: Other countries can have Tariffs on my country but my country should not be allowed to have Tariffs on other countries.
Or
Other countries should be allowed to jack up Tariffs on my country’s goods or not take my goods in to their country? Tariffs should be conducted in a fashion that benefits other countries but not the U.S. The reason being this is the way things have been done and should be done forever. If this is the case. Interesting.
I agree with you the showmanship shit and bluffs can only go so far. Though in general I view every politican as a actor on performance for his or her home team. Maybe Trump should talk less and just perform actions more. Save the talking for the professional Politicians on his team. But then again. I voted for him to protect the damn border around my country so there is that.
LikeLike
Canada had no tariffs on American products. The rewritten NAFTA trade agreement — WHICH TRUMP HIMSELF AUTHORED — gave leeway to all three North American countries to open up their borders to each other’s products. Canada, because of its cheaper devalued dollar, and government-provided health care, can make cars, energy and other things in a better deal than the Americans themselves can.
Your point about protecting the border is a valid one. It remains to be seen whether the Trumpster has the cojones and the wherewithal to defend the integrity of America’s southern borders from the coyotes who bring in truckloads of illegal immigrants past the flimy fence that straddles the border between two countries. If nothing else, a Trump Wall would be a fine legacy to leave behind.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okay. Point to you on the first paragraph. But your point on the second paragraph. If Trump fails then America falls further down the shitter and other governments have a good laugh at him and America.
Does Trump have the balls to protect his own country? Is the American military able to defend their own border? Will America fall to the Mexican Cartels? Is North America that weak? All a possibility.
Chalk it up to my American arrogance but I’m little hopeful and a lot more accustomed to enduring hard times. Hope for the best prepare for the worse.
Time and devil will tell.
LikeLike
Good comment. You’ve got more insight than you give yourself credit for; don’t be intimidated by longer comments from some of the other participants.
As for your writings, Trump has the balls to protect America, but he may be hamstrung by those around him. America won’t fall to the cartels because it has a superpower’s level of military excellence and dedication from the armed forces. Your philosophy of hoping for the best and preparing for the worst is a wise one. Perhaps Trump is employing it even as we speak.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A very interesting piece indeed. The problem with America is that for the past few elections, Americans have been saddled with having to choose between the lesser of two evils. In 2020 Biden was the lesser, in 2024, it was Trump. This is why I voted for Jill Stein. Another example which sums up the US perfectly is the fact that just because it’s a Constitutional right, one is old enough to legally buy a gun before one can legally buy a beer.
LikeLike
Yes, that buying a gun before a beer is a peculiarity indeed. And the lesser of two evils is sometimes all we can do. Oftentimes, the need to reduce complex situations to manageable thoughts is an impediment on our reasoning process itself, lending itself to absurdist reductionism. Read widely and consult with knowledgeable friends.
LikeLiked by 1 person