Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Trump indicted, the man in the arena stands alone

Trump indicted, the man in the arena stands alone
Getty Images

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Trump is the man in the arena, as the fate of our democracy has so often revolved around this one man's performances. He may indeed fit the description of the man in the arena in the famous speech by President Teddy Roosevelt at the Sorbonne in Paris, France on April 23, 1910:


It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

This is an incomplete comparison to Trump, as pieced from Roosevelt’s message. Roosevelt goes on to say the following:

A democratic republic such as ours—an effort to realize in its full sense government by, of, and for the people—represents the most gigantic of all possible social experiments, the one fraught with great responsibilities alike for good and evil. The success of republics like yours and like ours means the glory, and our failure the despair, of mankind; and for you and for us the question of the quality of the individual citizen is supreme. Under other forms of government, under the rule of one man or very few men, the quality of the leaders is all-important.

And so it is the quality of the individual that must reign supreme. This man (meaning Trump) in the arena today is quite skillful at misleading himself as he first deceives himself so he can better deceive others. Today, as we watch Trump abandon both his friends and the Constitution of the United States, there are far too few who believe like Roosevelt that the individual citizen is supreme.

There are exceptions of course and former Vice President Mike Pence is one:

“Anyone who puts himself over the Constitution should never be president of the United States,” the former vice president said shortly after the indictment of Donald Trump.

Of course those who believe in Trump will say he is the embodiment of the man Roosevelt described; one who fights against his critics, one who gets up when knocked down, and one with incredible tenacity. Yet, we must also prepare to defend democracy from autocratic tendencies reframed as heroic antics as the politicization of our justice system by Trump and his co-conspirators has just begun.

As we watch the spectacle play out before us, a phrase coined by P.T. Barnum, showman, businessman and politician of the early 1800’s comes to mind; “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

Barnum, of course, was referring to the performances of his con-men at carnivals and circuses of the time. Call Trump what you may: con artist, snake oil salesman, huckster, or charlatan, he is a master of the game. The successful con artist plays by certain rules; of course, they are his own, not those of civil society. To succeed the con artist must exaggerate, change the subject, and convince the buyer of his great success. In this case the American voter is the buyer, oftentimes conned to praise the con artist for solutions to problems he himself authored.

The con artist relies on the worst instincts in his audiences to make the sale; emotions of fear, being better than other people, envy, and greed. To be successful he must bring out the worst in his customer (i.e. the voter), vanishing from responsibility once the trap of the con is laid and set. But this is not to diminish the con man's ability; he pulls complicated and delicate strings, establishing himself as the man in the arena with unique responsibility. We are already witnessing the accusations and innuendos, the misinformation and vilification of those within the Justice Department.

Will we find the courage as a nation to have our voices heard to protect and defend our democratic republic for future generations? Will we understand that, whether we are Democrats, Republicans or Independents, what we have in common is stronger than what separates us. Will we have the wisdom and confidence to overcome our current circumstances? Will our nation be an example of the profiles in courage expressed by President John F. Kennedy over 50 years ago:

“In whatever arena of life one may meet the challenge of courage, whatever may be the sacrifices he faces if he follows his conscience – the loss of his friends, his fortune, his contentment, even the esteem of his fellow men – each man must decide for himself the course he will follow.”

The survival of our democratic republic will require each of us individually to have the courage to take action outside of our normal comfort zone. If we each do so, our individual courage will inspire others to do the same and be the galvanizing force to change what is possible.

Will we have that courage?


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less