Humanity Caught in a Loop

Noam Chomsky’s assertion that “there’s no more morality in world affairs, fundamentally, than there was at the time of Genghis Khan” casts a stark light on the enduring primacy of power over ethics in global and domestic spheres. Trump’s pathological narcissism—manifested in his reckless tariff policies, equating self-worth with monetary net-worth, viewing relationships as zero-sum, and taking trade imbalances personally—exemplifies the amorality Chomsky describes. Power’s raw dynamics, unchanged across centuries, drive today’s crises, undermining any illusion of moral progress.

Cyclical Attitudes and the Myth of Moral Evolution

A Facebook post urging viewers to watch the first two episodes of 1971’s All in the Family captures the cyclical nature of human attitudes: “50 years have passed, but nothing has changed.” The sitcom, with Archie & Edith Bunker’s chairs enshrined at the Smithsonian, tackled racism, prejudice, and gender roles, using humor to expose bigotry’s flaws. As the Smithsonian notes, it reflected “the very issues dividing American society,” yet its impact was paradoxical. A study by Neil Vidmar and Milton Rokeach found that non-bigots saw their values affirmed, while bigots viewed Archie as a hero, his slurs validating their biases. This selective perception reveals a timeless human flaw: we cling to preconceptions, resisting moral growth.

Today, Trump’s resemblance to Archie—nostalgic, divisive, unapologetic—suggests history loops rather than advances. That millions of Americans have said Trump “says the things I’m thinking” uncovers a persistent undercurrent: they harbor resentments, feeling “emasculated” or threatened by progress. This echoes medieval tribalism, where power thrived on division, not unity. If morality had evolved, why does a 1971 sitcom’s bigotry resonate in 2025’s politics?

In fact, Trump is a devolved version of Archie Bunker who, though unpleasant and bigoted, is essentially a decent man, the head of a close-knit family who loves his wife and daughter, tolerates his son-in-law, and struggles with his inability to understand the upheavals in society. Archie’s depth and dimension were due in large part to Carroll O’Connor’s affecting performance. He humanized the man, slowly revealing a wounded soul who struggles with his fears and whom audiences could hate, pity, and maybe even like, all at the same time.

Trump’s Narcissism: Tariffs as a Mirror of Pathology

Trump’s economic policies, particularly his 2025 tariffs, exemplify the amorality of power, driven by a pathological narcissism that equates self-worth with monetary net-worth and views relationships as zero-sum. Dr. Bandy Lee, in The More Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, describes Trump’s malignant narcissism—grandiosity, empathy deficits, and a need for validation—as a public health threat. Her 2024 warnings of his cognitive decline and “shared psychosis” with followers frame his tariffs as less policy than projection. Trump announced sweeping tariffs on April 2, 2025. The stock market plummeted, yet Trump boasted of countries “kissing my ass” (NYT, April 8, 2025), revealing a leader who sees economic chaos as personal triumph.

This recklessness stems from Trump’s zero-sum worldview, where trade deficits are personal affronts. Lee notes that narcissists like Trump perceive losses as attacks on self-worth, driving irrational retaliation. His tariffs treat trade as a contest he must win, regardless of cost to Americans. Globalization, despite flaws, lifted billions from poverty and doubled U.S. wealth post-NAFTA, yet Trump’s tariffs risk “eviscerated retirement savings” and “blown-up supply chains.” His claim that tariffs restore “Made in America” pride ignores economists’ warnings of inflation and recession.

Trump’s equation of net-worth with self-worth is evident in his profiteering. Senator Adam Schiff’s 2025 call to investigate insider trading—after Trump paused tariffs, spiking markets—suggests he manipulates chaos for gain. This aligns with Lee’s view of sociopathic exploitation, where public harm feeds personal aggrandizement. For Trump, tariffs aren’t about fairness but ego, a medieval power grab dressed in economic rhetoric, proving morality in world affairs remains elusive.

Leadership Without Conscience

Dana Nessel’s critique—“no law that Trump will not break, no depth to which he will not sink”—paints a leader unbound by ethics, akin to historical warlords. Her charge that Trump seeks to be “king,” not president, reflects his tariff strategy: unilateral, unaccountable, and destructive. Nessel’s observation that he “cares nothing for America’s global reputation” is borne out by alienated allies. Canada and the EU, hit with tariffs, now question U.S. reliability. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s hope to “reach a deal with allies” falters when Trump insults them as “not perfect economic allies.” This zero-sum stance—win or dominate—sabotages cooperation, echoing Lee’s warning that narcissists see relationships as battles.

Trump’s appeal—“tens of millions” embracing “unconscionable” thoughts—suggests a moral void not just in leadership but in society. His “collective toxicity” mirrors Lee’s “deterioration of collective mental health,” driven by Trump’s propaganda. Trump voters see tariffs as “redemption,” not economics, a cult-like faith in chaos over reason.

Immigration Abuses: Power Without Restraint

Trump’s immigration policies further expose this amorality, wielding power with chilling disregard for human cost. Reports of U.S. citizens detained by immigration officials highlight a system unmoored from ethics. A University of Michigan student’s attorney was held for 90 minutes at Detroit Metro Airport, asked to surrender his phone and contacts. A Chicago native endured 10 hours in ICE custody, stripped of wallet and phone. A 10-year-old U.S. citizen with brain cancer was detained with her undocumented parents en route to hospital care. Attorney Danny Woodward told the Post, “The administration talks a lot about targeting criminals, but they’re just not… This is what happens when you scale up immigration enforcement with no guardrails.” The subsequent closure of DHS’s Civil Rights office after Woodward’s complaint suggests deliberate suppression of accountability.

An Australian with a valid work visa, deported after attending his sister’s memorial, was told, “Trump is back in town; we’re doing things the way we should have always been doing them.” About 90% of migrants deported to El Salvador in 2025 had no U.S. criminal record (Migration Policy Institute, March 2025), underscoring a policy driven by spectacle, not justice. These acts—indiscriminate, punitive—evoke historical purges, where power silenced morality to cement control.

Institutional Erosion and Global Consequences

Trump’s attacks on institutions reveal a broader assault on moral frameworks. The freezing of $790 million for Northwestern and $1 billion for Cornell targets academia, perceived as a “hostile cultural power.” Georgetown’s Jewish community condemned Trump’s “weaponizing” of faith to arrest a professor, framing it as an attack on free speech. Vox’s question—why universities don’t use endowments to resist—underscores the chilling effect: fear stifles opposition. The New York Times warns of “gulags” with no judicial recourse, as Trump’s policies bypass due process, deporting critics to places like El Salvador. His alignment with Netanyahu is steering the US and Israel toward “brutish ethnonationalism.” Consumer sentiment, plummeting to near-record lows in 2025, reflects economic fallout from Trump’s tariffs. His erratic pauses, like the one Schiff flagged, create a “meme stock” economy—volatile, untrustworthy. Lee’s fascism definition,“mental pathology in politics,” fits here: Trump’s denial of fault, projecting chaos onto others, wraps itself in supposedly patriotic symbols like MAGA hats, “Trump Bibles” and, recently, Trump lapel pins. Her historical warnings predict fascism cloaked as “Americanism,” a prophecy fulfilled when tariffs are sold as “liberation” while harming the public.

Counterpoint: Progress or Facade?

Some argue morality has advanced since medieval times. Human rights laws, democratic checks, and cultural works like All in the Family—backed by Norman Lear’s liberalism—suggest progress. Yet these are brittle. Lee notes media and academia’s silence on mental health risks, while Nessel sees Trump trampling rights unchecked. The New York Times reports allies decoupling from a “friendless” U.S., as tariffs shred trust. If morality governed, cooperation would prevail over Trump’s zero-sum nationalism. Instead, his narcissism—seeing trade as a personal scorecard—revives ancient power games, where winners crush losers.

Chomsky’s claim resonates because morality in world affairs bends to power, as Trump’s narcissism vividly shows. His tariffs, driven by a need to equate wealth with worth, treat trade as a zero-sum duel, harming millions while he boasts of dominance. All in the Family’s lessons—bigotry’s persistence—live on in his appeal. Immigration abuses and institutional attacks expose a leader unchecked by ethics, echoing Lee’s warnings of fascistic pathology. America’s republic falters when pathology prevails, proving that morality, in politics or global affairs, remains a fleeting hope against power’s timeless tide.