When Power Has No Limits

We are living through a moment in history that feels unstable not just because of one politician, but because of what that politician represents.

Donald Trump is not simply a controversial leader. He is a stress test – for American democracy, for international norms (standards), and for human nature itself.

The deeper question is not “What will Trump do next?” but “What happens when power stops believing in limits?”

* Listen to audio here  *

In recent years, ideas that once seemed unthinkable are now openly discussed.

Military intervention (involvement, interference) without international consent (agreement).

Open threats against sovereign (independent, self-governing) territories.

The normalization of breaking international law if it serves national interest – or personal interest for that matter.

Even if some of these actions never happen, the talk itself matters. International law is not enforced by a global police force; it survives because powerful countries agree to respect it.

When a superpower signals that rules are optional and without consequence, it quietly gives permission to others to think the same way. If one leader can justify force for oil, security, or pride, why can’t others do the same for their own reasons?

Consider Venezuela. Many Venezuelans celebrated the removal of Maduro because they were exhausted by corruption and economic collapse. Their relief is real and understandable. But relief does not automatically equal justice or long-term flourishing (prosperity, progress, healthy growth).

When an outside power intervenes primarily for resources or geopolitical advantage, can it truly be trusted to build a real democracy? Or does it create a fragile system – one that looks democratic on the surface but serves foreign interests beneath it?

History gives us reasons to be cautious. Because remember, the United States has done this same thing, often less explicitly, many times in other countries as well.

Inside the United States, the erosion (breakdown) of trust may be as dangerous as their foreign policy. Incidents involving law enforcement and political violence raise an unsettling question: what happens when citizens stop believing that institutions serve everyone fairly?

Societies do not collapse only because of coups (revolution, overthrowing of government) or invasions. They collapse when trust disappears—when people believe rules are selectively enforced and power protects itself. In such conditions, fear grows, anger spreads, and calls for “strong rule” become tempting.

Authoritarianism (dictatorship, all-powerful, strict rule) often arrives not because people love it, but because they are afraid, tired of chaos and want stability.

This raises uncomfortable questions about the people surrounding Trump. Most of them clearly understand his selfish dishonesty and instability. So why do they stay loyal? Some seek power. Others fear losing status. Many convince themselves they are “managing” him or that history will judge at a much later time.

This is a common human behavior: moral (ethical, good) responsibility is postponed, outsourced, or buried under ambition. Short-term survival often feels more urgent than long-term reputation or morality. Maintaining their power advantage feels more important than upholding peace, justice and dignity for fellow citizens of their country and for global citizens around the world.

The same logic applies to tech billionaires and corporate elites (top wealthiest people). Their support is rarely ideological. It is transactional  (business, exchange, give and take). They want access, protection, and advantage in uncertain times. Yet this strategy assumes that power can be controlled, that instability can be ridden like a wave – if you adjust your surf board to stay on top while others drown (die under water) in the water. History may suggests otherwise. 

For Japan, these questions are not distant. How should Japan respond to rising tensions with China and uncertainty about American leadership? Does adopting a “strong” posture prevent conflict – or risk increasing it?

When global leadership becomes unpredictable, smaller and mid-sized nations must rethink what security really means.

Ultimately, this moment forces us to confront (face, acknowledge) something deeper than politics. Humans evolved for small tribes (groups, communities), not global systems armed with nuclear weapons.

Fear pushes us toward tribal (defensive, protective, us vs. them) thinking.

Stress rewards simple stories and strong leaders.

Democracy, by contrast, requires patience, restraint, and shared belief in limits.

So the final question is not whether democracy is perfect. It is whether we are willing to protect democracy when it feels slow, frustrating, and fragile.

The danger of our time may not only be the monsters in power – but ordinary humans, under pressure, slowly accepting that rules no longer matter. 

Because both global leaders and normal citizens possess the ability and choice: to either risk dying while helping their neighbors... or, to fight and kill them for resources when disaster strikes.

Our humanity is being tested on the global political stage. Hopefully, for normal citizens like us, we will be prepared to pass the test if it becomes a requirement.

* Listen to audio here  *

---

Are you ready to

think creatively and

connect globally

in English?   Join

Online or in Yokohama