The Illiteracy of the Trump Administration
What happens when U.S. foreign policy is run by faux intellectuals rather than people who have actually read things?
Historically, U.S. presidents — especially the iconic commanders in chief — have been well read. The founding fathers were all learned men who read and wrote a great deal. Abraham Lincoln was an extremely well-read man who composed some of the greatest oratory in American history. Harry S Truman did not attend college but was well known as a voracious reader of history. Barack Obama’s oratorical skills continue to be admired or envied by his contemporaries, and his book lists have certainly penetrated popular culture.
The hard-working staff here at Drezner’s World has already commented on the Trump administration’s unfamiliarity with basic political science. But this has not stopped Trump or his acolytes from trying to claim that they too are well-read. After all, Trump is the “author” of multiple books, although his role in actually writing them appears to have been pretty limited. And even now, in a moment when Trump prides his “gut” in making decisions, his staffers continue to insist he’s the most well-read person in the room:
The funny thing about the Trump administration is that they try to have it both ways on this: belittle any well-read opponent as an out of touch egghead unfamiliar with the cold realities of the world, while at the same time claiming that MAGA and only MAGA understand the deep truths about international politics.
As someone who literally teaches a course called Classics of International Relations Theory at the Fletcher School, it has been painful to watch Trump and his acolytes reduce the international relations canon into macho bromides in order to justify their bone-headed, poorly-thought-out strategic fiascoes.
Consider, for example, two classical thinkers that Trump and his acolytes like to embrace: Thucydides and Machiavelli.
Back in January, Stephen Miller, one of Trump’s most loyal acolytes, tried on his best Thucydides impression when talking to CNN’s Jake Tapper:
We live in a world in which you can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else, but we live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world that have existed since the beginning of time…..
We're a superpower. And under President Trump, we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower.
This sounds an awful lot like the most famous line in Thucydides’ history of the Peloponnesian War — the proclamation by the Athenians in the Melian Dialogue that, “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.” Indeed, this subsequent statement by the Athenians during the Melian Dialogue sounds awfully Trump-y:
Of the gods we believe, and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever they can. And it is not as if we were the first to make this law, or to act upon it when made: we found it existing before us, and shall leave it to exist for ever after us; all we do is to make use of it, knowing that you and everybody else, having the same power as we have, would do the same as we do.
Given that the Athenians eventually got what they wanted at Melos, is this an example of Trumpsters recognizing the same iron laws of power that the Athenians recognized 2500 years ago?
Well, no. Because anyone who possesses a familiarity with Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War beyond the aforementioned quotes will remember three important things about Athens:
By that point in the history, war had so consumed the Athenians that their previous recognition of the virtues of honor and interest — on display in Pericles’ funeral oration and the Mytilenean Debate — had dissipated. Athenian exceptionalism as an idea had ceased to exist by that point in the conflict;
Athens failed to successfully coerce Melos into submission despite their overwhelming power advantage. Athens had to kill all the grown men and sell the women and children of Melos into slavery; and
Right after the Athenian victory at Melos, the city-state makes the ill-fated decision to invade Sicily. That ended… poorly.
The real lesson of Thucydides’ history is that while might can make right in the short term, over the long term the actors who believe in that principle overreach and hasten their nation’s downfall.
The other classical thinker that Trump and his minions love is Machiavelli. As Luke Hallam observed a year ago, “it seems natural that commentators turn to The Prince to explain the particular ruthlessness of his new administration. It’s not hard to find articles using The Prince to explain why Trump is the Machiavellian genius of our time.”
Trumpsters are particularly fond of Machiavelli’s dictum as stated in The Prince that, “it is much safer to be feared than loved.” Trump himself once told Bob Woodward, “Real power is – I don’t even want to use the word – fear.” As the Guardian’s Patrick Boucheron wrote back in 2020 about Trump’s statement, “This sentence could have been written by Niccolò Machiavelli.”
Again, however, anyone who has actually read all of The Prince knows that there additional passages that highlight the current administration’s unfamiliarity with the totality of Machiavelli’s thinking. For example, in the very same chapter that Machiavelli talked about it better to be feared than loved, he also cautioned, “a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated.”
Machiavelli elaborated on that point in a subsequent chapter:
The prince must consider, as has been in part said before, how to avoid those things which will make him hated or contemptible; and as often as he shall have succeeded he will have fulfilled his part, and he need not fear any danger in other reproaches.
It makes him hated above all things, as I have said, to be rapacious, and to be a violator of the property and women of his subjects, from both of which he must abstain. And when neither their property nor their honor is touched, the majority of men live content, and he has only to contend with the ambition of a few, whom he can curb with ease in many ways.
It makes him contemptible to be considered fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute, from all of which a prince should guard himself as from a rock; and he should endeavor to show in his actions greatness, courage, gravity, and fortitude; and in his private dealings with his subjects let him show that his judgments are irrevocable, and maintain himself in such reputation that no one can hope either to deceive him or to get round him.
In his history of Florence, Machiavelli also offered a cautionary warning about the use of force: “Wars begin when you will, but they do not end when you please.”
As President Trump continues to careen from claims of negotiations to intemperate threats of, you know, war crimes, remember this: the folks running this war believe that they have pretty much figured out how the world works. But the cliches that they like to spout should remind everyone that they have no depth to their knowledge. And everyone will pay the price for their boastful ignorance.
I had to giggle (darkly) at the image of George Marshall and Harry Truman’s shades listening to the spoiled kid from Santa Monica explain the “iron rules” of the world.
What an ultramaroon, as Bugs would say.
What happens when a war is run by two very damaged men?
The psychology of someone in power bringing ruin to all is generally rooted in a combination of narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy (the "Dark Triad"), and a phenomenon known as hubris syndrome, which is an acquired personality change resulting from the possession of immense power. This state often leads to reduced empathy, impaired judgment, intense egocentrism, and a reckless disregard for the well-being of others.
Psychological research suggests that power does not necessarily turn good people bad, but rather amplifies existing narcissistic or antisocial traits, giving them the "psychological freedom" to act on selfish impulses.
Here is a breakdown of the key psychological factors:
1. The "Dark Triad" and Personality Traits
Narcissism: Power causes individuals to develop a grandiose sense of self-importance and a desperate need for admiration. They believe they are special and entitled, leading to reckless decision-making that ignores the consequences for others.
Machiavellianism: These leaders view social interactions as power games and use manipulation, deceit, and ruthlessness to gain personal control.
Psychopathy: Manifests as a total lack of empathy and remorse, allowing leaders to destroy careers, organizations, or lives without guilt, often faking emotions to charm or deceive.
2. Hubris Syndrome and "Exception-Making"
As power becomes intoxicating, leaders develop a "hubris syndrome"—a disorder of the possession of power characterized by a sense of self-entitlement, grandiosity, and lost connection with reality.
Exception-Making: They believe the rules and laws that apply to others do not apply to them, leading to moral corruption and high-risk behavior.
The Power Paradox: The very traits that help people attain power—empathy, collaboration, and openness—are often lost once they achieve it, replaced by impulsivity and self-centeredness.
3. Cognitive Distortion and Faulty Feedback
The Bubble Effect: Powerful individuals often surround themselves with sycophants who tell them what they want to hear. This creates a "bubble" where the leader receives flawed feedback, causing them to believe their worst decisions are brilliant.
Cognitive Paralysis: They fail to learn from mistakes, believing their past successes mean they are infallible, leading to continued disastrous decisions (e.g., in business, the financial crisis of 2008).
4. Reduced Empathy and Objectification
Neurological studies suggest that high power can desensitize the brain, reducing "mirroring" (the brain process that helps us feel empathy).
Objectification: They see people not as human beings with needs, but as tools, pawns, or objects to be used for their personal, financial, or ego-driven goals.
5. Addiction to Power
Power acts similarly to a drug, creating a dopaminergic alteration where the brain craves more control and status. To maintain this "fix," they will sacrifice the stability of their organization or nation. When confronted with the damage they have caused, they often shift blame or react with immense rage, further escalating the ruin.
6. Destructive Self-Interest (vs. Socialized Power)
Personalized Power: These leaders use power for personal gains, including wealth, prestige, and dominance.
Scorched Earth: If they feel their power is threatened, they may "burn their own lives to the ground" (or their organization/nation) rather than relinquish control, often rationalizing this ruin as necessary for survival.
In essence, the ruin is caused by a person who has lost the capacity for self-reflection, perceives themselves as a savior or genius, and treats the rest of the world as replaceable extensions of their own ego.