Trump’s Machiavellian Ideology: The Politics of Power Over Morality
Donald Trump’s approach to politics, often described as transactional and pragmatic, has been likened to various historical and philosophical frameworks. However, a deeper analysis reveals that his ideology aligns closely with the principles of Niccolò Machiavelli, the sixteenth-century Italian philosopher best known for his seminal works The Prince and Discourses on Livy. Machiavelli’s political philosophy remains infamous for its unapologetic embrace of power as an end in itself, sidestepping moral considerations. By focusing solely on the acquisition and maintenance of power, Machiavelli provides a lens through which Trump’s “America First” doctrine and political tactics can be understood.
Machiavelli’s The Prince serves as a manual for rulers on how to achieve and retain power, emphasizing realpolitik over idealism. Machiavelli’s central argument is that the effective exercise of power requires pragmatism, adaptability, and often ruthlessness. While traditional political and philosophical theories of the time were grounded in moral or religious frameworks, Machiavelli deliberately excluded moral considerations from political decision-making. He famously declared that rulers must be prepared to act immorally if doing so serves the state’s interests, arguing that “the ends justify the means.”
In Discourses on Livy, which advocates for republican governance over autocratic principalities, Machiavelli further develops this theme. Even in his preference for a republic, he remains committed to the idea that political actions are justified solely by their ability to enhance the republic’s power. Philosopher Leo Strauss later criticized this perspective as embodying “collective selfishness”—a patriotism devoid of ethical substance, focused entirely on the survival and dominance of the polity rather than any higher moral good.
Donald Trump’s political philosophy, encapsulated in his “America First” agenda, mirrors Machiavelli’s power-centric approach. The core tenet of “America First” is the pursuit of the best possible outcomes for the United States, regardless of the moral or ethical implications of the means used to achieve them. This ideology prioritizes national self-interest over traditional international norms, alliances, or collective moral considerations, embracing a transactional worldview that evaluates success solely in terms of power and advantage.
For example, Trump’s foreign policy decisions—such as his approach to NATO funding, the withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord, or the renegotiation of NAFTA into the USMCA—reflect a relentless focus on securing what he perceives as favorable deals for the United States, even at the cost of global cooperation or ethical accountability. These actions align with Machiavelli’s counsel to leaders: to secure the interests of their state by any means necessary, including deceit, coercion, or unilateralism.
Machiavelli’s silence on morality in The Prince finds a modern echo in Trump’s rhetoric and policies. Whether addressing trade, immigration, or international relations, Trump rarely frames his actions in terms of ethical imperatives or global justice. Instead, his decisions are presented as transactional maneuvers aimed at ensuring American primacy. This rejection of moral considerations often draws criticism from political opponents and international leaders, but it also resonates with his base, who view his approach as pragmatic, unfiltered, and effective.
By elevating national interest above all else, Trump embodies Machiavelli’s belief that politics is a distinct domain where conventional morality does not apply. Just as Machiavelli argued that a prince must sometimes act immorally to secure his rule, Trump’s policies suggest a willingness to sidestep ethical norms when they conflict with his vision of American greatness.
The ideological parallels between Machiavelli and Donald Trump lie in their shared emphasis on power and pragmatism over morality. Machiavelli’s insistence that politics operates in a sphere separate from ethics finds a striking contemporary parallel in Trump’s “America First” doctrine.
Donald Trump’s application of principles is evident in both his domestic and foreign policies. By prioritizing outcomes over ethics, Trump reflects Niccolò Machiavelli’s advice to rulers: focus on achieving practical results and consolidating power, even if it means undermining traditional norms, institutions, or values.
Trump’s foreign policy decisions exemplify Machiavelli’s argument that a leader’s primary obligation is to secure the power and interests of the state, regardless of moral considerations or international criticism.
Machiavelli wrote in The Prince that alliances should be maintained only as long as they serve the ruler’s interests. Trump’s approach to longstanding alliances, such as NATO, reflects this principle. His demand that member states increase their financial contributions to the organization was framed not as a moral obligation to collective security, but as a transactional arrangement: the United States would honor its commitments only if others paid what he deemed their fair share.
Similarly, Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord in 2017 underscored his prioritization of national economic interests over global environmental responsibilities. While many world leaders viewed the accord as a moral imperative to combat climate change, Trump presented it as a deal that disadvantaged the U.S. economy. His decision reflected Machiavelli’s counsel that rulers must be willing to sacrifice ethical considerations when they conflict with state interests.
Machiavelli advocated for deception and pragmatism in diplomacy, advising rulers to appear trustworthy while acting in ways that serve their own purposes. Trump’s negotiations with foreign leaders, particularly authoritarian figures like Kim Jong-un of North Korea and Vladimir Putin of Russia, reveal a similar willingness to break with traditional norms of diplomacy. His summit with Kim, for instance, emphasized the spectacle of negotiation over tangible results, allowing Trump to project strength and control without securing significant denuclearization commitments.
By engaging with authoritarian leaders and sidestepping human rights concerns, Trump demonstrated a Machiavellian pragmatism: he prioritized short-term geopolitical gains and the appearance of strength over moral consistency. This approach earned him criticism from traditional allies but bolstered his reputation among supporters as a leader who put “America First.”
Machiavelli believed that a ruler must control public perception and maintain a firm grip on power through calculated actions. Trump’s domestic policies and political strategies reflect these principles, often subverting traditional democratic norms to achieve his objectives.
In The Prince, Machiavelli advises rulers to exploit divisions among their subjects to maintain control. Trump’s rhetoric and policies frequently emphasized divisive themes, framing political opponents, immigrants, and even parts of the media as enemies of the American people. This strategy galvanized his base while fragmenting opposition, allowing him to consolidate political power.
For example, Trump’s immigration policies, such as the travel ban on several predominantly Muslim countries and the construction of a border wall with Mexico, were framed as measures to protect national security and sovereignty. While these policies faced significant moral and legal challenges, they resonated with his supporters as bold assertions of American self-interest.
Machiavelli stressed that a ruler must be willing to bypass institutional constraints when they threaten his authority. Trump’s challenges to institutional norms—such as his frequent dismissal of judicial rulings, criticism of the FBI and Department of Justice, and refusal to concede defeat in the 2020 election—echo this Machiavellian principle.
His efforts to delegitimize the media, which he often labeled as “fake news,” further illustrate his strategy of undermining institutions that could constrain his power. Machiavelli would likely have approved of this tactic, as it allowed Trump to position himself as the sole arbiter of truth for his supporters, thereby strengthening his political influence.
Machiavelli wrote that a ruler must cultivate an image of strength and decisiveness, even if it is not entirely genuine. Trump’s mastery of media spectacle—whether through rallies, social media, or highly publicized executive orders—demonstrates his understanding of this principle. By dominating the news cycle and framing himself as a decisive leader, Trump shaped public perception in ways that reinforced his political brand, often at the expense of substantive policy discussions.
While Trump’s strategies align with Machiavelli’s pragmatic approach to power, they also raise questions about the long-term viability of democratic governance under such a framework. Machiavelli’s philosophy was developed in the context of autocratic principalities and fledgling republics, where the survival of the state often depended on the will of a single ruler or small elite. Applying these principles to a modern democracy like the United States, with its emphasis on checks and balances, individual rights, and the rule of law, creates significant tensions.
For example, Trump’s emphasis on loyalty to himself rather than to institutions or the Constitution undermined foundational democratic principles. His attempts to influence the Department of Justice and other agencies to serve his personal interests rather than the public good reflect a Machiavellian disregard for institutional integrity in favor of consolidating personal power.
Donald Trump’s policies and political tactics exemplify many of the principles outlined in Machiavelli’s The Prince and Discourses on Livy. From his transactional approach to foreign relations to his divisive domestic strategies, Trump’s leadership reflects a willingness to prioritize power over morality.
The political ideology exemplified by Donald Trump does not exist in a vacuum. By embracing Machiavellian principles, Trump represents a broader trend toward transactional, power-centric governance in both the United States and the international arena.
For much of the 20th century, the United States styled itself as a moral leader on the world stage. From championing human rights to promoting international cooperation through institutions like the United Nations, American foreign policy often sought to balance national interests with broader ethical commitments. Trump’s presidency marked a sharp departure from this tradition, embracing an unapologetically “America First” doctrine that prioritized transactional gains over moral obligations.
One of the hallmarks of Machiavellian governance is a willingness to manipulate institutions to consolidate power. Trump’s presidency repeatedly tested the resilience of American democratic institutions, from his efforts to undermine the credibility of elections to his challenges to the independence of the judiciary and law enforcement.
This erosion of institutional norms has lasting implications. By framing political opposition as disloyalty and portraying the media as enemies of the people, Trump deepened partisan divisions and weakened the trust necessary for democratic governance. Machiavelli’s idea that a ruler must focus on power at all costs is antithetical to the democratic ideal of accountability, and its application under Trump has left American institutions more vulnerable to future manipulation.
Machiavelli argued that a ruler’s success depends on their ability to project strength and decisiveness. Trump’s mastery of media and his cultivation of a personal brand—often at the expense of traditional party structures or coherent policy platforms—redefined modern populist leadership. His ability to dominate public discourse through social media and rallies allowed him to shape political narratives around his own persona, sidelining traditional mechanisms of policy debate.
This shift toward personality-driven politics, while effective in the short term, undermines the foundations of democratic governance, which rely on a balance of powers and the rule of law rather than the will of a single leader. Trump’s emphasis on loyalty and his willingness to sidestep norms in favor of personal power echo the Machiavellian principle that a ruler’s image is more important than their adherence to ethical or institutional constraints.
Trump’s Machiavellian approach is not unique to the United States. Across the globe, leaders who prioritize power and national self-interest over moral or ethical considerations have gained prominence. From Vladimir Putin’s authoritarian pragmatism in Russia to Jair Bolsonaro’s divisive populism in Brazil, the rise of leaders who adopt similar tactics signals a broader shift in global politics.
In an increasingly multipolar world defined by economic competition, resource scarcity, and geopolitical instability, many nations have turned inward, prioritizing national self-interest over collective action. Trump’s “America First” doctrine is part of a larger trend of transactional politics that prioritizes short-term gains over long-term ethical commitments. This approach resonates with Machiavelli’s assertion that leaders must prioritize their own state’s survival and dominance, even at the expense of others.
For example, the growing skepticism toward multilateral institutions like the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and the European Union reflects a global embrace of Machiavellian pragmatism. Leaders in this mold, like Trump, argue that such institutions constrain national sovereignty and demand sacrifices that do not align with immediate self-interest.
The global rise of Machiavellian politics also poses significant challenges to democratic norms. By emphasizing power over principle, leaders like Trump have emboldened authoritarian regimes and weakened international commitments to human rights, environmental sustainability, and the rule of law. The erosion of these norms risks creating a world order where might makes right, undermining decades of progress in international cooperation.
Donald Trump’s presidency left an indelible mark on both American politics and global governance. By prioritizing power and self-interest over moral and institutional constraints, Trump redefined what it means to govern in the modern era. His alignment with Machiavelli’s principles of pragmatism, divisiveness, and image-making highlights the enduring relevance of The Prince and Discourses on Livy in understanding political power.
However, the long-term implications of this approach remain uncertain. While Machiavellian tactics may yield short-term gains, they risk undermining the stability and legitimacy of democratic institutions. For the United States, the challenge will be rebuilding trust in its institutions and reasserting a moral vision for leadership both at home and abroad.
Globally, the rise of transactional politics threatens to erode the cooperative frameworks that have defined the post-World War II era. As nations grapple with the challenges of climate change, economic inequality, and geopolitical conflict, the question remains: Can the world afford a Machiavellian approach to leadership, or will it demand a return to principle-driven governance?
Donald Trump’s political ideology, rooted in a Machiavellian framework of power over morality, reflects a profound shift in the way leaders govern in the 21st century. By embracing the principles of The Prince—both in his domestic and foreign policies—Trump has redefined leadership as a pursuit of power unbound by ethical considerations. While this approach resonates with a global trend toward pragmatism and self-interest, it also raises urgent questions about the future of democratic governance and international cooperation.