Nelson is a retired American attorney and jurist who served as an associate justice of the Montana Supreme Court from 1993 through 2012, having been appointed to the court by then Republican Governor Marc Racicot.
Politically, our Country is a train wreck: polarized, partisan, and divisive. We have lost our moral compass: no longer united in the underlying democratic principles that gave birth to our republic; failing to work together to address existential threats to the continued survival of our species and many of the plants and animals upon which we depend for that; refusing to celebrate and honor our diversity and our individual, inviolable human dignity; unwilling to move our evolutionary needle forward in what may well be the geological blink-of-an-eye we have left to accomplish that; and staring into the abyss of authoritarianism and fascism.
Our federal legislative branch, Congress, is a joke—a taxpayer-funded food fight, populated with prima donnas, demigods, and, in large part, old white men and women. While the two major parties have always had different ideologies, there was a time when they could work across the aisle to govern for the good of the Country. But, now, what passes for governance is no longer of the people, by the people, and for the people, but, rather, of the party, by the party, and for the party—indeed, worse: of the extremists, by the extremists, and for the extremists.
And then there’s the executive branch, the presidency. The incumbent who, by many metrics has done well by the Country but is seen by many as to too old for another four years plus is likely to now get sidetracked by existent or non-existent ties to his sons problem is up against the most likely challenger: impeached twice, facing 91 counts of state and federal criminal charges, and according to The Washington Post fact checker has made 30,573 false or misleading claims in over four years.
Finally, the U.S. Supreme Court: partisan; ignoring precedent; insuring that the right of women to control their own reproductive choices will be a political decision, instead of the medical one it is--and, encouraging paternalism, patriarchy and misogyny, in the process; throwing voters under the bus of politicized state suppression and subversion of our sacred right of suffrage; facilitating sectarianism along with homo and trans phobia under the guise of free speech and religious liberty; and unwilling to establish its own code of ethics, while tolerating a level of corruption that would, very properly, result in the impeachment or recall of offending jurists in those states that still value fair, independent and impartial courts.
Is there a remedy before our democracy dies? In the short term, I doubt it. The train has already jumped its tracks.
But in the long term? Maybe; if Americans come to their senses, and if we recapture what used to be our “united” states, our moral compass.
It may take living under authoritarianism for a while. But, every people that has, eventually has thrown off these chains of fascism—and, in doing so, has executed, or driven into exile their oppressors.
Where will we start? Probably by making some basic amendments to our federal Constitution.
We must dump the Electoral College. We must impose term limits on every elected and appointed official, jurists included--20 years or age 70, whichever comes first. We must guarantee in the most unassailable terms possible one-person-one-vote, human dignity, no discrimination, and the true equality and civil rights of every human being.
We must impose firm campaign spending limits and financing regulations. Money must not equal speech. It is insane that America spends billions of dollars and endures years of campaigning to elect those who are supposed to be representing We the People. If we cannot elect public officials in three months, with voters taking the time and interest to determine candidate qualifications and ideologies based on factual messaging, then we truly deserve the train wreck along with the partisan hacks we presently elect.
We might adopt a parliamentary system--one requiring coalitions of those elected to join together to form a working government.
Indeed, as King Arthur was dying he uttered: “The old order changeth, yielding place to the new, and God fulfills Himself in many ways, lest one good custom should corrupt the world.”
What started as the good custom of our United Republic, has been corrupted by extremist partisan politics and venal politicians.
It is time for the old order to change--and yield place to a new one.
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.