Ruling without limits

In 1788 James Madison, in Federalist No. 48 commenting on the American Constitution wrote, “An elective despotism is not the government we fought for … the powers of government should be divided and balanced among several bodies (legislative, executive, judicial) of magistry as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”

Today, his worst fears are being realized.

At the time, his concern was the overreaching power of the legislative arm (Congress), the argument supports a system of checks and balances, which has since become a principle not only of politics but also of human relationships. Today the difference is that the executive branch (the president) constitutes an elective despotism, governing without limits, running roughshod over Congress, the courts, and the other check, the opposition Democratic Party.

Most recently, the sitting president demolished part of the White House, unilaterally overriding the precedent of that authority accruing to the National Capital Planning Commission. This is only one of the latest, seemingly arbitrary, decisions which ignore established constraints.

More serious are three other earlier moves — a global tariff regime, an anti-immigrant purge and attacks on Venezuelan ships in international waters — all taken without the necessary prior approvals from Congress and the latter a breach of international law. All taken under the guise of “national emergencies,” as if everything which does not please him, or anything he can use to further a mean-spirited ideological agenda, is an emergency.

The U.S. Supreme Court has failed to be a necessary check, granting him immunity for virtually everything he does while president. And Congress, both the House of Representatives and the Senate, have unquestioningly followed his orders until now, abrogating their responsibilities as balanced checks on presidential power.

But if that is not enough, it does not end there. In addition to ignoring political limits, this president also violates most moral and social boundaries, most noticeably those involving truth and reality.

In addition, he has orchestrated a government shutdown which threatens food security and health care for millions of Americans while claiming Americans are better off than ever before. He supports a campaign by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. opposing life-saving vaccinations, claimed remedies for autism prevention and promoted unproven therapies and practices without evidence while decimating the health-care infrastructure.

On a personal level he claims to be a Christian but makes no effort to be Christ-like. He declares to hate his enemies which include a broad swath of the citizens he was elected to represent — Democrats, women of colour, the gender-diverse, and anyone who dares to criticize or disagree with him. And his frequent disrespectful comments about women’s appearances and their cognitive abilities, along with his support of anti-abortionists and male domination, reveal a deep-seated misogynistic and archaic chauvinism.

He is a convicted felon but denies any wrongdoing; talks “tough on crime” but has innocent people threatened and arrested without due process; and watches impassively as families are torn apart at the border, while simultaneously pardoning and commuting the sentences of known insurrectionists, right-wing domestic terrorists, and fraudsters.

On the international level, he courts and praises totalitarian dictators while maligning the United Nations, the International Courts, and cutting American aid to needy countries. He talks peace-making but promotes violence and war-making, recently reinserting nuclear weapons competition. He insults democratic leaders, often calling them weak, and belittles America’s allies if they do not rain enough praise on him. In the process, he seemingly doesn’t recognize the resentment he is fuelling against America globally.

His overreach, which will eventually prove his downfall, is blatantly evident everywhere — wantonly threatening other countries’ sovereignties; the news media’s independence; post secondary institutions’ autonomy; sports bodies’ decisions and teams’ names; the entertainment industry; arbitrarily changing geographic, government departments’ and public buildings’ names; and, indicting anyone who brought legal action against him.

This snapshot only touches upon the immensity of his well-known indiscretions and wrongdoing.

Finally, he just outright lies about just about everything, especially in creating myths about his own prowess — his health and cognitive abilities: crowd sizes at his rallies; his negotiating skills; the negative impact of tariffs and shutdowns on already disadvantaged Americans; his role in “peace” talks and their success; his corrupt strategies to increase his personal wealth; the list seems endless — his self praise has no limits and he places no constraints upon himself.

However, we might all remind ourselves that being self-governing without boundaries comes at a price — that of ending up in a perpetual state of dissatisfaction, uncertainty and unhappiness which is how I see Trump.

When anyone becomes totally self-centred, entitled and arrogant they are not dependable, and they have no external criteria against which to judge their behaviour or actions. And they are not to be trusted or loved, only feared and avoided as much as possible.

In education, we often state as a goal that we want young people to become self-regulating individuals, but we do not mean “Trumps.” We mean people who willingly are constrained by the law, live within acceptable social conventions, treat others with respect, tell the truth, accept the realities of life while trying to make themselves and the world better. In other words, lead responsible, wise lives expecting others to do the same.

None of us can pull this off on our own — we all need reminders, parameters, standards of behaviour and the supports from others that comes from living within them in a kind of dynamic, fragile but pleasant relationship.

John R. Wiens is dean emeritus at the faculty of education, University of Manitoba.