Arthur E. Sowers is a resident of Harbeson.
Yes, in Trump 2.0, for every new friend he made, he also made two to three more new enemies. I found that out by entering that as a question to three different artificial intelligences, and they all stated essentially the same thing. It was true globally, as well as nationally. And that is consistent with his national and international approval/disapproval polls. If you don’t believe me, go and submit the question to an AI on your own. It will take only a few minutes. But it should be intuitively obvious that it is bad to make more enemies than friends, under almost any circumstance. There are many reasons why this is bad.
First, the historical two-sentence quote most relevant to this letter is this: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” It comes off the Acton Institute website.
And it should be obvious that Donald Trump thinks, talks and acts like a power-hungry, control freak medieval king.
Second, adding to this story about Lord Acton’s quote, above, is this Wikipedia article, “Democratic peace theory.” I quote this sentence from that article: “‘monadic’ forms of this theory (democracies are in general more peaceful in their international relations); ‘dyadic’ forms of this theory (democracies do not go to war with other democracies); and ‘systemic’ forms of this theory (more democratic states in the international system makes the international system more peaceful).” For all the troubles in the Middle East, you might be surprised to learn why this is so by reading this Wikipedia article, “Democracy in the Middle East and North Africa.” Short summary: There almost isn’t any democracy there. And another example article is from Tufts Now: “Why Is Democracy So Elusive in the Oil-Rich Middle East?” Or, in other words, we are better off trying to hang on to our democracy than let “king Trump” become King Trump.
Third, we get another piece of the puzzle by asking if any dictator, ever, had a positive effect on the well-being of a country and its people. I asked a lot of artificial intelligences a lot of questions about this. I found out that, for dictators — or de facto dictators — in large, strong countries (e.g., Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Putin, the Kims of North Korea), there were wars, high amounts of corruption and the people were worse off. In small, weak countries, there were cesspools of corruption, more poverty and no civil rights (think Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, the Somoza-Sandinista dynasties in Nicaragua, the Castros in Cuba). Dictator Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore did grow the economy, but the media was controlled, the rich-poor divide became worse, and there was no freedom of speech or civil rights. So, that is three lines of thinking that should warn you against letting Trump dismantle our democracy. And, for Xi Jinping of China, the AIs wrote that he is required to “work with” his other officials, and that means he strictly cannot be simply a “dictator.”
Fourth, for another comparison, only 7% of the people in the world live in a strong democracy, while three-quarters live in dictator, autocratic or rigged-election governments. For details, here is one article on that issue, from the Swedish Development Research Network (a downloadable comprehensive report is also there): “V-Dem Democracy Report 2026.” Some websites rate the U.S. — now — as a weak democracy. So, we are not part of that 7%. Below rigged elections are banana republics and failed states.
But Trump has been claiming all kinds of wild things about election fraud, etc., before the 2026 election. All he needs is an excuse — real or concocted — to declare a national emergency to give himself the power to “take over.” If he does, that means an additional “manual override” on more of our Constitution and one more step closer to full dictatorship.
I submitted to Google this keyword string: “Trump efforts to cause election chaos to justify declaring national emergency.” I got a lot of links to articles. This Sept. 2 article, from the Center for American Progress, is one: “Despite President Trump’s Claims of Foreign Election Interference, He Has No Legal Authority To Declare a National Emergency and Unilaterally Nationalize Elections.” That article is pretty clear, but do you think that would stop Trump from writing up an executive order to allow himself to do a “manual override” in his own favor? Well, this Feb. 27 PBS News article said there is already a 17-page draft of such an order: “Trump says he’s not mulling a draft executive order to seize control over elections. Here’s what we know.”
Moreover, this Oct. 8 People’s World article gives a lot more information on that question: “Credible sources say Trump readies to steal the midterm elections.” And this Sept. 4 The Hill article — where an attorney who worked for the first Trump administration was interviewed — has this title: “Ty Cobb on midterms: Trump intends ‘to steal these elections where possible.’” Then, this Oct. 16 ProPublica article is just a sample of other articles debunking Trump’s claims of voter fraud, etc.: “‘Devoid of Any Factual Basis’: Again and Again, Judges Have Dismissed Trump’s Voter Data Lawsuits.” This Oct. 7 Newsweek article worries me: “Donald Trump Vows ‘Big Surprises’ With Project 2025 Author Before Midterms.” My idea of a great country is where you get a feasible quality of life, emotional and economic calm and stability, and as much freedom and civil rights as possible. Right now, Trump is taking us away from all that.
Until Donald Trump entered politics, I was always satisfied and comfortable with our elections and two-party system. Almost everyone, if not everyone, always “played nice.” For the 2020 election, Trump “played nasty.” In any contest, the judges’ decisions are final. Not so with Trump. His “play nasty” is like, “Heads, I win. Tails, you lose.” In a month or two, I expect all hell will break loose. I hope I am wrong.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
