Columnist David Brooks notes that some people seem to be thinking they want a superhero for president. His piece is worth reading: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/the-governing-cancer-of-our-time.html.
And given the popularity of the Avengers movies, etc., maybe people do think everything would be better is a superhero stepped in. Not me.
I'm a huge comic book fan, but having a superhero for president would be a colossally bad idea. Even comic book writers agree that such a thing would end badly. They've thought this through already.
Yet to think that so many people want Donald Trump to be their superhero makes my skin crawl. He certainly promises super deeds. He will wipe out ISIS "very quickly." He will re-write trade deals and bring jobs back to America with a wave of his sceptre. By decree, King Donald will build that wall and clean up the inner cities. All "very quickly."
A Constitution unfit for a king
However, Trump and his followers seem to forget that's not how our Constitution -- that imperfect document drafted by imperfect people that actually did make America great -- is set up. Our founders wrested the colonies away from one of the biggest kingdoms there ever was. Because they were sick of being exploited by a greedy king. Because EVERY king has ALWAYS been a greedy exploiter.
They designed a Constitution with all its checks and balances specifically to make sure we never, ever get a king. And then George Washington decided not to be a king when he could have. And mercifully, our puny upstart nation was lucky enough that the war technology of the day was such that it simply cost the kingdom we were abandoning too much time and resources to kill all those pesky rebels.
And thus we have presidents, not kings.
Our school books remain packed with the conquests of assorted kings. Everybody can name a bunch of kings. But there's a reason why so many current and former students cannot remember the names or deeds of so many of our presidents. Our Constitution specifically prevents presidents from making all the rules.
Outside of wartime leadership duties, EVERYTHING that gets done in this country gets done through Congress. Boring, semi-anonymous, seemingly constantly gridlocked Congress. And when you don't make the rules, not many people remember your name. Not many historians deem you necessary to study.
Trump isn't about any of that, is he? He's not interested in being the next Millard Fillmore, Grover Cleveland or whoever. He wants to be historic. Because he wants to be a king.
Democracy still in diapers
Maybe Trump's popularity in country that doesn't have a king shouldn't be so shocking. After all, living without a king is a very new idea in the world.
Humans have lived many thousands of years under the rule of kings -- be they little tribal chiefs with big ambitions, big imperial emperors with even bigger ambitions, second-rate loser dictators reduced to crushing their own poor nations, or mechanized monsters of modern warfare like Hitler and Stalin who threatened the very existence of humanity. (70 years later and we are STILL living with the consequences of their horror).
Sadly, even after World Wars I and II shut down a bunch of monarchies, many millions of people still live under the rule of kings, just under different labels. People are subject to Saudi princes, Russian narcissists, Chinese party bosses, that weird fat guy in North Korea, and assorted other thugs and murderers.
So I have a theory.
I wonder whether our lingering hunger to be ruled by evil murderous kings is the result or reflection of centuries of planetary-scale genetic selective breeding. Maybe we are an entire planet of people suffering from Stockholm syndrome.
It could be a numbers game. Those who resist kings tend to get killed early. Which over the centuries reduces the numbers of free-thinking people, while those who survive have learned to kneel. Entire populations of people bred through a brutal process of elimination to understand at a genetic level that unless you are one of the few strong enough to rule, loyalty is the only path to survival. And thus the king's subjects teach their kids to kneel and live.
Maybe the lingering effects of this process can explain why so many Americans still love royalty so much. Our experiment in democracy is what, roughly 240 years old? That's not much compared to 4,000 years since the pharaohs started stomping around, and that's just recorded history.
So how does this connect to Trump? Well, I think when there is no king, certain types of people get uncomfortable. They feel lost. They hunger for simple, autocratic solutions for complex, messy problems. As soon as they hear king talk, they flock to the latest Great Leader. I think that's what Trump is tapping into.
Make no mistake, Trump is running to be king. He actually thinks that's what the presidency of the United States has become -- a throne.
He has every intention of using the Constitution as pillow for his imperial butt while he dictates orders. Put Hillary in jail. Build that wall. More guns and bombs. Lock up the libelous press and lock down that pesky Internet.
Kill the enemy -- whoever the king decides that may be. Kings get to be whimsical and impetuous about stuff like that. Under Trump's rule, the trains will run on time. Believe him. It will happen very quickly. Very quickly.
The world needs no kings
Well I say we don't need a king. The world doesn't need any more kings.
Kings know how to do one thing: seek power. They exist to conquer. And when they can't conquer some other kingdom, they turn inward and turn their subjects against each other.
Kings kill by the tens of thousands. The history of monarchies is drenched in oceans of blood. And it only gets worse when the kings get religion involved.
Is Trump going to launch a wave of murder if he gets elected? Will he actually try to dissolve our government? It seems unlikely. I want to believe that the rest of America is still too strong to let such a nightmare actually happen. But after hearing Trump's over-the-top words, and the way his crowds chant, I'm not prepared to say impossible anymore.
Many, if not all, of the politicians who seek the presidency have been power-seekers, no doubt. But only a few (like FDR) wanted to be president-king. Most entered office knowing and understanding that limited power for the president is a CORE aspect of the Constitution. And then they SWORE to uphold that document.
This is why it bugs me to no end that the GOP has placed such a cluelessly anti-separation of powers, dictator wanna-be on the top of its ticket.
This is the party that claims to care deeply about the Constitution (sanctity of the 2nd Amendment, pushing for judges who believe in "strict constitutionalism," etc.) And yet, that party tolerates, even cheers for, a thug who thumbs his nose at such basic aspects of our Constitution that it became a thing for protesters to wave pocket-sized versions of the document at Trump.
Trump never talks about honoring the democratic process (it's all crooked. The votes are rigged) He never talks about working with Congress nor even having a shared agenda with the party that nominated him. Instead this dictator wanna-be dismisses even his own party as utterly disconnected from what HE intends to do for -- and to -- this nation.
Trump claims he loves this country and all of its people. Name a dictator who hasn't said such platitudes. Name a king who hasn't tried to rally the masses to his banner. Name a king who hasn't sworn to his God to "protect" HIS people.
And we haven't even discussed his penchant for grabbing lady bits.
This is how much people want a king
On the other side of the ledger stands a woman who wants to be an actual president -- not a superhero. Not a queen.
Unlike Trump, Hillary Clinton states an intent to introduce her agenda via bills and budgets to CONGRESS, which actually holds the primary power of this nation. She talks about working "across the aisle" and uses all those words that show she actually understands how our government actually works.
Unlike Trump (the CEO-king), Clinton actually has served as a Senator and as a Secretary of State. Disagree all you want over whether she did a good job, but she actually took oaths of office. She actually works within the confines of our Constitution.
And yet, a huge mass of people hate her anyway. She's the corrupt and phony one, not the boy-man under that hair.
The good news appears to be that the Donald has finally shot enough holes in his own boat to sink himself. And maybe a bunch of other rats will go down with him. But to me, that's small relief.
"His" people still want a king. And those people are us.