The Emperor Has No Institutions: Why Trump’s Cracks Signal a Dangerous Trend
For an American, touring the grandiose monuments of ancient Rome and Renaissance Italy—as I did recently—is an oddly relatable experience these days. From the triumphal arches to the soaring basilicas and opulent palaces, a pattern emerges: a historical parade of leaders prioritizing self-glorification. This isn’t a foreign concept, but one that feels increasingly familiar in the current political landscape. The question isn’t if power corrupts, but what happens when institutions designed to check that corruption are systematically eroded.
The Allure – and Danger – of Unilateral Power
Historically, the American political tradition, rooted in the Cincinnatus ideal of civic duty and limited power, stood in stark contrast to the imperial ambitions of past rulers. But the rise of Donald Trump, with his unabashed embrace of personal branding and a willingness to flout established norms, has blurred that line. His actions – from questioning alliances and coveting territory to perceived attempts to weaponize the Justice Department – echo the behaviors of autocrats throughout history. But it’s not simply the behavior itself that’s alarming; it’s the realization that the safeguards meant to prevent such overreach are proving surprisingly fragile.
Cracks in the Foundation: Pushback and Its Limits
Recent months have witnessed a notable shift. For the first time, Trump has faced significant resistance, even from within his own party. The botched Ukraine “peace proposal,” widely criticized as a surrender to Russia, sparked outrage among Republicans like Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham. This isn’t merely policy disagreement; it’s a challenge to the very notion of unilateral decision-making. Similarly, pushback on proposed tariffs and attempts to eliminate Affordable Care Act subsidies demonstrate a growing unwillingness to simply rubber-stamp presidential directives. However, this resistance is often reactive and case-by-case, lacking a cohesive strategy to rebuild institutional strength.
The Roman Precedent: Institutions as the Bulwark Against Tyranny
Historian Edward J. Watts, in his book The Romans: A 2,000-Year History, argues that the longevity of great states hinges on a delicate balance: enlightened leadership and robust institutions. Rome’s success, even under flawed emperors, stemmed from its adherence to established traditions. The United States, founded on the principles of checks and balances, initially mirrored this model. George Washington’s deliberate emulation of Cincinnatus wasn’t just symbolic; it was a conscious effort to establish a precedent of limited power and respect for institutional norms.
The Erosion of Restraint
The danger, Watts warns, lies with “charismatic disruptors” who disregard established procedures and attempt to impose their will on the system. The U.S., he argues, has been steadily dismantling those institutional restraints over the past decade. The recent judicial rebuke of Trump’s attempts to use the Justice Department to target political enemies – Judge Cameron Currie’s ruling that ultimate responsibility lies with Congress and the courts – is a critical, albeit precarious, victory for those restraints. But it’s a victory that highlights just how far those restraints have been stretched.
Beyond Trump: A Systemic Vulnerability
The current situation isn’t solely about one individual. It’s about a systemic vulnerability. The willingness to challenge norms, to disregard precedent, and to prioritize personal loyalty over institutional integrity has become increasingly normalized. The defection of Marjorie Taylor Greene, while dramatic, is symptomatic of a broader fracturing within the conservative movement, fueled by disillusionment and a growing awareness of the potential consequences of unchecked power. The surprisingly strong Democratic performance in recent state elections further underscores this shift.
The Future of American Power: Rebuilding Trust and Tradition
The question now is whether the U.S. can rebuild the institutional guardrails that have been weakened. Simply removing a disruptive leader isn’t enough. A fundamental reassessment of the relationship between power and accountability is required. This means strengthening independent oversight bodies, reinforcing the rule of law, and fostering a culture of respect for established norms. It also means recognizing that institutions aren’t merely bureaucratic obstacles; they are the foundations of a stable and enduring republic. The alternative – a continued erosion of those foundations – risks a future where the “Emperor” truly has no institutions to hold him accountable, and history, as it often does, repeats itself.
What steps do you believe are most critical to restoring institutional trust and safeguarding against future abuses of power? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
