Skip to main content

Posts

Machiavellian MAGA

   The Trump team and their modus operandi Why do intelligent, hard-working people work for someone like Donald Trump? Cynics might call them sycophants, boot-lickers, minions, or, maybe, leeches. On the other hand, these people may be Machiavellian instrumental egotists. They see their lives as economic models of human relationships and their interactions as transactional. Their moral values have been replaced by continuous cost-benefit analyses. As such, their actions toward Donald Trump are designed purely for their own life ambitions and objectives. Their only concerns about the fortunes of Trump, his office, or even their country are merely risk factors in their own life. This is quite different from calling them a sociopath, psychopath, narcissist, or sycophant. It describes their motivational and behavioral architecture without assuming a psychiatric disorder. These people can be very rational, socially sophisticated, disciplined, and more than capabl...
Recent posts

Who Realy Wants This Job Anyway?

Lead, follow, or get AI'd . . . Consider, for a moment, an old and unglamorous fact about our species. Long before we built parliaments, wrote constitutions, or even carved the first law into stone, we were primates arranging ourselves into troops. And every troop, from the baboons on the savanna to the earliest human bands crouched around a fire, discovered the same problem: someone had to decide when to move, when to fight, when to share the kill, and when to hoard it. Leadership never was an invention of civilization. It is older than civilization, older than language itself, written into the nervous systems of social animals a hundred million years before anyone thought to ask whether power corrupts. And yet we go on being surprised by it. Every human hierarchy, given enough time, seems to drift toward the same failure. Power collects at the top, and the top grows heavy. The people making decisions become, by slow and almost imperceptible degrees, insulated from the people livi...

When We Choose to Have No Choice

   The oldest pattern in human history — conquest, comfort, collapse — may be running its course again, this time in Washington There is an old proverb, worn smooth by centuries of use in a dozen languages, that too many cooks spoil the broth. A companion saying, less quotable but truer, holds that there is never enough agreement to decide, but always enough to delay. And beneath both sits a harder observation, one that historians have been rediscovering in every collapsed empire from Rome to the Qing: when everyone is responsible, no one is responsible. Committees do not lose wars or empires. They simply fail to notice, in any timely manner, that they are losing them. This is not an argument against democracy so much as an argument about democracy's purpose. Shared rule buys legitimacy, flexibility, and the capacity to correct course without bloodshed — real advantages, and rare ones in the historical record. But it has always carried a cost: diffuse respons...

History Never Repeats; It Recycles

   Empires do not collapse overnight. They fray at the edges, lose the habit of self-belief, and discover too late that the center cannot hold. The Long Arc of Governance Only one formal republic has survived more than a few centuries in the full sense of that word: San Marino, a city-state barely larger than Manhattan. The lesson is not that republics are fragile, but that they are demanding. They require citizens who are willing to subordinate private grievance to collective rule, and leaders who accept that the office is larger than the man who holds it. When either condition lapses, the republic does not necessarily end—it transforms, often into something unrecognizable. Cultures, by contrast, endure by absorbing change rather than resisting it. China offers the most instructive example: its governing structures have been overthrown and remade a dozen times across four millennia, yet a recognizable civilizational continuity persists. The lesson America ...