Molineaux is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and president/CEO of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
Power is a tool – it can create new innovation or destroy a culture. When we are empowered, we have the capacity and ability to do something effectively. Who has the power to fix democracy? The U.S. Constitution sets up a power-sharing rule of law to mitigate the consolidation of power by monarchs and oligarchs.
There are two sets of laws that people live by. The first are the primordial Laws of Power. These are the rules of the jungle; eat or be eaten. The second set of laws undergird a democratic society; a mutual agreement to live by the Rule of Law. These two sets of rules are in absolute conflict with each other. The Rule of Law is a relative newcomer, where the Laws of Power can be traced back through human history. I propose that the Rule of Law was developed to thwart the Laws of Power and level our playing field. The Rule of Law is a prerequisite for pluralism to survive and flourish in a democratic republic.
I’ve been listening to the 48 Laws of Power. It’s a 25 year old book that resonates today as a dystopian social game, increasing human cruelty and suffering, while privileging a few. Yet still, these laws are widely used by people who seek power. Chronicling conflict throughout human history, the book shares lessons that can inform how the game of power is played. In the game of power, domination over others is the measure of success. And like any good read, it filters my view of the world in a new way. Everywhere I look I see elements of the Game for Power which is fueling the breakdown of our societies, worldwide. To be clear, I do not like this book about the game of power.
The game of power does not lead to peace and contentment. It leads to power. Power to do what? That depends on who holds it. This is where the Rule of Law is more helpful.
Personally, I reject a philosophy or society that is based on the Laws of Power as outlined by author Robert Greene. Yet I see aspects of his work in the world around me, including every authoritarian regime on the planet. Freedom for all is only possible if we mutually follow the Rule of Law earnestly.
My interest in the Laws of Power is to quickly identify and thwart the tactics and power moves that do not serve the public or humanity. These are the laws exploited by psychopaths and sociopaths, con artists and cult leaders. It’s one of the most requested books in prisons; subject to book bans. And yes, I’ve used some of these tactics myself; it made me feel ill. It is the game of domination, where the will of a few is forced upon all is a primitive form of governance. Do not fool yourself; if you compete in the Game of Power, you are sowing the seeds of our collective destruction.
Ultimately, a collaborative and cooperative society is healthier and more sustainable for all humans. This means electing steward leaders as outlined in our representative democracy. We the People, by adhering to the Rule of Law, strengthen our democratic practice. In general, the Rule of Law in the United States still functions. If We the People fail to believe in evidence, sworn testimony and jury verdicts, the authoritarian tendencies in those among us are strengthened.
One of the many reasons the Laws of Power are so effective, is that the dehumanization of others is central to the game. Division and isolation of “enemies” are tactics. We have a loneliness epidemic in the United States and other western countries. If you want to see the results of “winning” the game of power, you only need to look around you at what isn’t working for We the People. And in this new age of artificial intelligence, dehumanization of others may emanate from despots and autocrats and also from machines.
For example, when examining the tactics of former President Trump, he clearly prefers the Laws of Power to stay dominant in “the game.” For instance, we’ve seen him deploy:
- Law 6: Court Attention At All Cost
- Law 12: Use Selective Honesty and Generosity to Disarm Your Victim
- Law 17: Keep Others in Suspended Terror: Cultivate an Air of Unpredictability
- Law 21: Play a Sucker to Catch a Sucker - Seem Dumber than Your Mark
- Law 27: Play on People’s Need to Believe to Create a Cult Like Following
- Law 32: Play to People’s Fantasies
Let’s be honest here. Trump uses most of the 48 Laws of Power. I picked those that seemed most obvious to someone who is not in the MAGA community.
To preemptively negate power-seeking through politically motivated investigations, there are DOJ policies to follow. According to the Code of Federal Regulations, a special counsel must have “a reputation for integrity and impartial decision making,” as well as “an informed understanding of the criminal law and Department of Justice policies.” to fulfill his or her mandate to investigate and possibly prosecute an individual. This certainly gives the individual significant power and they will undoubtedly be accused of playing politics. Not every special counsel finds corruption. This is how it should be.
From media coverage, it appears that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation is also using the more subtle Laws of Power, such as:
- Law 3: Conceal Your Intentions - no leaks to the media
- Law 4: Always Say Less Than Necessary - let the facts speak for themselves
- Law 9: Win Through Your Actions, Never Through Argument - act through the court, not the media
- Law 22: Use The Surrender Tactic: Transform Weakness Into Power - allow Trump to continue making public appearances and speak about the case
- Law 29: Plan All The Way To The End - allow the courts to do their job, scenario-planning all the possibilities.
Smith’s success very well might come from refusing to play the game of power in a way that Trump would win. Instead, he chips away, point by point, using the rule of law.
How might we employ the Rule of Law in healthier and more equitable ways? If the U.S. Constitution was drafted to defend common people from the Laws of Power, how might we better enact and live into that intention?
One way would be to embrace a multicultural, pluralistic society. To actively engage in our communities despite our disagreements. Democracy is the process by which we settle our differences and live peacefully. Without the Rule of Law, the game of power will reassert itself. As we have lived through these last few years. It’s harder to engage and debate and argue. But it’s even harder to regain democratic values once an authoritarian has “won” the game of power.
Let’s thwart the power-games by believing in and upholding the Rule of Law.
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.