Good news (sort of)!
There will be something for everyone to like in the Trump presidency, decisions
that comport with your own particular political disposition or interests. Bad news: there will also be many things to
dislike, and many more things—perhaps greatest in number—that will be just
plain mystifying. President Trump
promises to be a one man wrecking ball who will dramatically expand the effects
contemplated in Edward Lorenz’ chaos theory. (Butterflies beware!) How can this be? Why?
The answer resides in Trump’s cognetic profile
that is, by my assessment, completely devoid of a value system that assures
coherent decision making.
From weird, to weirder, to weirdest, off we go! As columnist Gerald Seib suggested in his
recent Wall Street Journal column,
“It’s nearly impossible to identify a
clear ideological bent in the incoming president’s early moves … the
definitions of left and right, liberal and conservative, are being scrambled
right before our eyes.”
Similarly, Christopher Buckley was asked to explain whether
or not his father, the late William F. Buckley, would have considered Trump a
conservative. The son demurred,
observing that
“it’s difficult to discern any identifiable ideology,
philosophy, or politics behind his curtain; instead, only an insistent, clamant
narcissism that one hopes will come to an inflection point and re-purpose
itself in the service of those who have installed him at the center of our
democracy.”
Yes,
“one hopes,” but my expectations follow a different maxim: take him at his word
and plan accordingly.
So what
are values and why are they important?
Values are the principles we embrace that are essentially our
interpretations of concepts, norms, and ideas that allow us to simplify the
world and make decisions. In my
development of cognetics, they act like a box of filters and impellers that
sort out the myriad of variables we must consider to make decisions; some information
is blocked while other information is sent forward for further
consideration. I further argue that
without this set of values that allow us to reconcile dissonance in our
world—too simplify it and make decisions—we would go insane. It is unlikely Trump is insane (at least not
in the clinical sense), but his many inconsistent incoherent statements and
behaviors are precursors of insanity. He
is definitely on the spectrum, somewhere right of delusion and left of insanity. The inherent pressure of the presidency—the
volume and velocity of decision-making—will most certainly exacerbate this
condition, pushing him further toward insanity and potentially even physical, emotional, and psychological
collapse.
To
be fair, many, including Trump himself, have suggested that he has clear
values. Suggestions include things like winning,
money, his children, and especially himself. However, these are not values. Winning is an outcome, money is a means, and
the others are, well, people. They are
not values; they are not durable interpretations that provide fundamental
beliefs and convictions that predict future behaviors and decisions, which is
why Trump can be confounding and appear reckless. None of which is particularly concerning in
his role as real estate developer and reality TV star, but when combined with
the power of the presidency disaster is a near certainty.
Presently,
Trump is best described as a conundrum. Many
have already recognized his recent decisions are a product of whom he spoke
with last. This presents problems in
domestic affairs, but the most dangerous effects are in foreign affairs since
other world leaders must (nearly always) consider what the United States, the
world’s lone superpower, will do on an array of issues. Trump’s value-free presidency increases risk
in foreign affairs exponentially. He has
already declared his foreign policy will be “unpredictable starting now.” Misinterpreting what one state or another may
do in an anarchic international system is profoundly dangerous, as we saw in
the outbreak of violence that escalated into World War I.
Recently,
Trump decided it was best to blow up our forty year-old “One China” policy by
engaging directly with Taiwan. Although
as an isolated issue this may not appear to be dangerous (his supporters view
it as enlightened and powerful), policies like One China comprise the
foundation of stability in a unipolar, one-superpower, world. Trump may never launch a weapon first, and his
bluster may be confined by other realities, but other world leaders may act
first, and violently, in anticipation of what he promises to be “unpredictable”
behavior.
Sugar-free
and gluten-free may be good for you, but buckle up, value-free is going to be
one hell of a ride.
Gerald F. Seib, “Trump Shuffles the Ideological Deck”
in “Capital Journal” section, wallstreetjournal.com, 5 December 2016.
Christopher Buckley, “What Would William F. Buckley
Have Made of Donald Trump?,” Vanity Fair,
5 December 2016.
See, Nick Wadhams, “Trump’s ‘Unpredictable Starting Now’ Foreign
Policy,” Bloomberg, 5 December 2016.
