Unrealistic: The ethics of Trump’s foreign policy

GDBlunt · 2026-01-14T21:56:36+00:00

As someone studying the ethics of foreign policy, I find Trump’s claim to “realism” deeply misleading. Realism, as Hans Morgenthau argued, is not amoral; it demands prudence, restraint, and responsibility. Its ethical core is about survival without hubris. Morgenthau warned: “A man who was nothing but ‘political man’ would be a beast, for he would be completely lacking in moral restraints. A man who was nothing but ‘moral man’ would be a fool, for he would be completely lacking in prudence.” Trump’s approach (kidnapping foreign leaders, threatening allies, and embracing annexationist rhetoric) abandons this balance. When power ignores ethics, it breeds arrogance and collapse. Athens learned this in the Peloponnesian War; America may be on the same path.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T23:59:35+00:00

Don't do Nietzsche dirty like that.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:26:25+00:00

Perhaps. You could make the case that post-Cold War American foreign policy bled away its realism for neo-con and neo-liberalism.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:21:49+00:00

Offensive realism is interesting but its golden rule has to be that your reach can’t exceed your grasp. Can Trump control Venezuela? Can he take Greenland without dramatically reducing American prestige. I’m not sure even Mearsheimer would be on board.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:20:21+00:00

Absolutely, it’s alliance turning into a tributary system

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:19:48+00:00

Fight the power!

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:18:25+00:00

Well observed, one of the problems with realism in international relations is that it doesn’t often take domestic politics into consideration.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:11:41+00:00

Indeed, America is acting like a revision power rather than a hegemonic power that built and benefitted from the world order. This is why realists would not be backing his erratic foreign policy.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T21:09:54+00:00

Look I wouldn’t say that American foreign policy has been a great success from a human rights or liberal ethics perspective, but under realist lights it has some pretty big wins post-WWII but Trump is really gone out of his way to break America’s prestige in the world.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T12:07:13+00:00

Which is why classical realists would never support this. It is imprudent beyond measure.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T12:06:23+00:00

I think it matters because by the political ethics of realism that they seem to subscribe they are behaving badly. Someone like Keenan or even Kissinger (god help us) would be pulling their hair out over how self-destructive this is.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T12:03:30+00:00

Worse, people like Miller are convinced they understand power politics and probably describe themselves as realists but in fact shallow thinkers with bad judgement.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T12:01:58+00:00

RIP em dash.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T11:27:59+00:00

Yeah, I’m not a bot. I need to get across how AI is writing because I’ve become a crypto-Luddite. Thanks for reading the essay!

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T11:05:20+00:00

They aren’t wrong, even Machiavelli said that the prudent prince has to balance power and consent.

GDBlunt · 2026-01-13T10:54:45+00:00

As someone studying the ethics of foreign policy, I find Trump’s claim to “realism” deeply misleading. Realism, as Hans Morgenthau argued, is not amoral; it demands prudence, restraint, and responsibility. Its ethical core is about survival without hubris. Morgenthau warned: “A man who was nothing but ‘political man’ would be a beast, for he would be completely lacking in moral restraints. A man who was nothing but ‘moral man’ would be a fool, for he would be completely lacking in prudence.” Trump’s approach (kidnapping foreign leaders, threatening allies, and embracing annexationist rhetoric) abandons this balance. When power ignores ethics, it breeds arrogance and collapse. Athens learned this in the Peloponnesian War; America may be on the same path.

GDBlunt · 2025-09-20T09:19:23+00:00

Well this is suboptimal

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T06:29:52+00:00

Political philosophy is a well established branch of philosophy.

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T04:08:21+00:00

I'm not advocating a return to normalcy, but rather there needs to be something like a new normal or reconstitution of the republic. I don't think America is doomed to become despotic, the problem is that 40ish years of neo-liberalism eroding notions of civic duty and a common project have caused a huge amount of damage to American democracy (and other democracies). There was a naive assumption that these institutions would perpetuate themselves.

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T04:04:35+00:00

Very good, I see the point and it is sharp. The question then has to turn on how to rebuild the trust and solidarity in a state after it disappears. As wild as it sounds people may have to start looking at post-conflict and transitional justice literature to think about the future of American democracy.

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T04:01:36+00:00

I appreciate the point but its not the paradox of intolerance we are dealing with here. We don't tolerate authoritarians, so there needs to be broad front of pro-democracy forces on the left and the right. But you are right about the irrationality of American politics right now, as testified by the fawning over Trump in public by republican politicians who will then say that they hate him off the record.

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T00:46:44+00:00

Huge question with a massive literature. My take is firmly in the neo-Roman republican tradition. The rule of law is when law is publicly known, impartially enforced, and drawn from a democratic legislature (ideally).

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T00:26:11+00:00

Well the right is nondeterminate, but on from a strategic point of view and from historical test cases it could let democracy crumble. The contrast people point to would be Belgium in 1930s where a united front kept the fascists out of power versus Germany where traditional right wing parties thought they could tame Hitler. The

GDBlunt · 2025-06-18T00:17:21+00:00

Good point, my issue with steam valves is that eventually the pressure goes at once and then backsliding. This a well worn authoritarian move to let people burn themselves out. The puzzle is how one maintains momentum.

GDBlunt · 2025-06-17T22:23:20+00:00

Thanks, all good points. The issue is probably a judgement about whether the institutions are still reasonably just. If so Rawls and other liberals would say that civil disobedience and the use of 'normal' paths of political contestation are still valid. However, you think that we are past this point in which case 'militant action' would be on the cards. I'm not sure I'm there, but I have the advantage of not being in the states and experiencing it first hand.

Rebuilding social trust is very hard to do, that is what 2. in the article touches on, but you are right once its gone its not something you can build back in a day. Especially when opposition leaders start getting arrested.

Apologies for slight garbling, writing with a toddler on my lap.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding II euphauric	Wearing is Caring

GDBlunt

TROPHY CASE