Becvar serves as Chief Operating Officer of the Bridge Alliance.
In our highly charged political climate, the assertion that polarization is the most urgent issue facing America is a statement often heard (and repeated). But is it truly the crux of the matter?
The May newsletter from Horizons Project brought forward a perspective on this topic by offering reference to a podcast featuring Shannon McGregor called “Is this Democracy.” McGregor challenges the notion that polarization is the core problem, suggesting instead that the major threat to American democracy lies in the radicalizing right. By labeling polarization as the main issue, we may be taking an easy way out, avoiding the critical examination of the actual problem at hand, and fostering an unhealthy rhetoric of reconciliation.
On the latest “How Do We Fix It?” podcast, Bill Shireman discussed the notion that the majority of common-sense voters defy the prevailing divided paradigm. Their discussion highlighted how the recent debt ceiling compromise highlighted that party leaders could work together when necessary, even while their members fan the flames of partisan blame. Similarly, the Democracy Works podcast delved into the perverse incentives and resulting behaviors within the current political system that significantly challenge democracy. Addressing this challenge requires the dedication of public servants and constituents who reject candidates playing games with the well-being of our nation.
Acknowledging the radicalizing aspect of some of America’s political right, anti-Trump conservatives have taken action. In a featured piece in The Fulcrum, David L. Nevins highlights the efforts of organizations like the Renew America Movement, Stand Up Republic, RePAIR, and The New Conservatives Summit. Moreover, Republican lawmakers supporting the For Our Freedom Amendment were recently highlighted by American Promise. The Election Reformers Network reminds us that we can’t always assume the worst about political actors, as evidenced by Republicans’ involvement in the Electoral Count Reform Act. However, recent legislative actions by Texas Republicans on election rules serve as a stark reminder of the challenges we continue to face.
At the Bridge Alliance, we firmly believe that there is no single solution to cure the ailments of our democracy. A recent study by More in Common, reported by the American Values Coalition, revealed that correcting misperceptions about those from the “other party” reduced partisan animosity - but the effect disappeared within a week. This study reinforces the importance of adopting a multi-level approach to address these issues. We need dedicated leaders, and constituents must demand more from them.
Democracy relies on an informed and engaged citizenry, making civic education key to a democratic future. It empowers individuals to evaluate information critically and demand better news reporting. Engaging in conversations with those outside our comfort zones is vital to becoming better civic stewards. Applying hard-earned insights from the peacebuilding and mediation field is essential to be effective. We also need structural changes in how and with what funding we elect our representatives to ensure a healthy democracy.
Fortunately, our nation has a growing and dynamic ecosystem of individuals and organizations tirelessly working towards shared goals. They continue to persevere despite facing backlash and personal risk, driven by their determination to build a stronger democracy for all. Most importantly, they demonstrate that addressing the underlying issues, rather than risking complacency by labeling them all as simply ‘polarization,’ is essential. Only by confronting the genuine threats to our democracy can we pave the way for a more resilient and healthy democratic future.
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.