Jarell Corley is a US Army Field Artillery Officer currently serving in South Korea, a national spokesperson for Open Primaries, and a native of Chicago. The views expressed in this article are that of the author and do not represent the views or opinions of the Department of Defense, The United States Army, or any governmental agencies affiliated with The United States Government.
With Brazil’s recent insurrection following the recent trend of civilian upheaval starting with the January 6th insurrection, we must ask ourselves how America will lead in 2023 as the future for democracy around the globe grows ever dimmer. Other instances bringing democracy’s fate around the world into question include England’s messy succession crisis, Russia’s Ukraine invasion, Chile's vote on a radical constitutional amendment, and Peru’s post election upheaval.
As the leading force of democracy in the world, America must question old assumptions and embrace new mechanisms, such as open primaries, by which its democracy operates.
The push for electoral reform amongst independent voters is growing more popular in our country, as they push for full voting rights. Open primaries would further democratize our system of voting and put more power into the hands of the American people. Embracing such a reform could create a new model for American Democracy empowering individual communities from the ground up and ultimately begin to solve the crisis within the halls of our nation’s Congress.
If proven effective here in America, this new model could serve as the light piercing through the veil of darkness enveloping modern democracy around the world as well. There is no question about American influence on the global political scene and with so much of the world emulating our likeness, democracy’s future depends on our ability to get our own house in order.
As a Commissioned Officer serving in the Republic of Korea, America’s global influence couldn’t resonate with me more as I immerse myself into a new culture abroad. Like many democracies around the globe, Korea’s government closely mirrors that of America. Korea has three branches of government along with two major political parties fighting for power. Similar to America are also the Korean election cycles and the makeup of its version of Congress known as The National Assembly. One day while reading the Korean news, I literally thought I was following American politics as the content coverage was eerily similar.
The Republic of Korea debates many of the same issues we do, such as the economy, foreign policy, and women’s rights, among other topics. Additionally, they have polarized points of view covering these topics just as here in America. Interestingly, upon doing further research on other Democracies around the world supported in one way or another by America, I found striking similarities with their systems of government as well.
Making this discovery was quite astonishing and has made me realize the independent voter movement’s push for open primaries and other electoral reforms goes beyond building a better democracy here at home. The importance of this movement extends beyond America’s borders and is critical to the continued longevity of democracy around the world.
With the many images in the global media showing a divided populace, unable to work together in the midst of chaos throughout the many countries of the world, my experiences in the United States Army show a side of the coin not often portrayed by the media. This side is a portrait of the other America. Those active duty military and veterans fortunate enough to serve their country for a purpose greater than self. This is the side of America that has weathered all the storms testing our great Nation pushing us ever closer to embody the spirit of our constitution and furthermore to provide opportunity for all who live within these borders.
If our active duty military and veterans who served can work together and accomplish a common purpose, imagine what our country could accomplish if a new form of democracy-like open primaries- empowered independent voters so that all voters could work together rather than against one another. Accomplishing this would not only build democracy in America, but offer a beacon to other world democracies to continue to build their own systems to ensure equal voting rights for all the world’s citizens.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.