What would you do if you were Trump?

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

Hey everyone,

I want to pose a thought experiment that goes beyond the typical left vs. right political debate.

Most of us here can see that movements like MAGA aren't just random occurrences; they are symptoms of deeper, systemic breakdowns. They tap into legitimate grievances: economic precarity, a sense of lost identity, and the feeling that the system is rigged. The standard political response is to simply fight the symptom, which only creates more division.

What if, instead, we applied some second-tier thinking? What if we engaged with the stated desire ("Make America Great Again") but offered a more holistic, systems-level solution that actually solves the root problems?

This is the core idea behind a blog post I've been involved with. It’s a "trojan horse", a detailed 10-point plan written in the style of a populist manifesto, designed to be accessible to a MAGA supporter, but with the "DNA" of the Global Governance Frameworks.

The goal isn't to trick people, but to practice strategic empathy. To meet people where they are and build a bridge to a more conscious and regenerative future.

Here’s a quick summary of the proposed "American Renewal Doctrine":

• Fixing the Economic Operating System: Instead of just complaining about jobs, it proposes an Adaptive Universal Basic Income (AUBI). This isn't just a handout; it's a dynamic system that provides a security floor while rewarding community contribution through a "Patriotic Hearts" currency. It's designed to eliminate survival anxiety so people can move toward self-actualization.
• Reweaving the Social Fabric: It addresses the breakdown of communities not with more policing, but with things like the "Kintsugi Protocol" for restorative justice and Citizen Assemblies to bypass political gridlock. It focuses on rebuilding trust from the ground up.
• Shifting the Game of Civilization: It reframes global competition. Instead of tariffs and isolationism, it proposes winning the 21st century by being more innovative and collaborative through concepts like an open-source "Discovery Commons" and a new global mission focused on shared threats ("Earth Defense Force").

The entire exercise is a look at how to apply high-level, integral thinking to the messy reality of modern politics. It's an attempt to design a system that works for everyone, from the forgotten worker in the Rust Belt to the tech entrepreneur in Silicon Valley.

I'm posting this here because I think this community is uniquely equipped to discuss the meta-strategy. Is this a viable way to heal political divides? What are the blind spots of this approach?

You can read the full blog post here: [https://globalgovernanceframeworks.org/blog/what-we-would-do-if-we-were-trump?lang=en]

What do you think? If you had the power, what would your systems-level approach be?

[Innerview]

The article mentions creating American Citizen Assemblies:

”Create panels of randomly selected, everyday Americans to tackle our toughest challenges—immigration, infrastructure, the national debt. Not politicians, not lobbyists, not pundits—real people finding common-sense solutions.”

But how can we trust every day people without expertise to make decisions on highly complicated topics?

Very good article btw.

[Apparition of Jack]

Release the Epstein files.

[Emerald]

I think this is an excellent post. It very much mirrors some themes that have come up in my medicine journeys.

So much of what is happening politically is just the surface-level symptoms of deeply ingrained collective Shadows, needs, and psychological patterns.

So, I have thought about what the roots causes of rising Fascism and authoritarianism (more generally) are...

• Authoritarian parenting - which primes people to idolize authoritarian figures who demonstrate absolute certainty
• Disconnection with humanity, the planet, and reality at large
• Projection of shame onto a scapegoated other
• The powerlessness over economic struggles (and the transference of blame onto a scapegoated other)
• The unconscious need for limitation
• The desire to abdicate responsibility and project responsibility/blame onto the scapegoated other... and project responsibility onto the parental authoritarian

Let me break down my explanation a bit more...

Reason #1 - Authoritarian parenting:

This was studied after WW2, when a group of researchers wondered what the main factor was that made people susceptible to being sucked into the Nazi ideology. And they found that the number one factor that caused people to become Fascists was being raised by authoritarian parents.

And what happens is that the child projects their authoritarian parents onto the demagogue... and reverts back to a childlike state with the demagogue where they can put all their trust into that demagogue to operate like a 100% perfect parent who always knows best. And they follow the demagogue like a cult-leader.

Then, they project their negative feelings of anger and resentment towards the authoritarian parents towards those in weaker social standing. It's similar to how an abused child might not feel safe taking their anger out towards their parents that abuse them... but will instead transfer those feelings onto a younger sibling and start trying to dominate and terrorize the younger sibling.

This is what happens to the scapegoated groups in a Fascist dictatorship... like women, ethnic minorities, religious minorities, the LGBT community, etc. They are the ones that the disowned negative feelings about the authoritarian parents (and authoritarian dictator) get projected onto.

And it's a more individual trauma with regard to authoritarian parents that demagogues have learned to collectively "hack" in order to get traumatized people to project their authoritarian parents onto themselves... and to get people to direct their negative feelings about those authoritarian parents onto a scapegoated group.

Reason #2 - Disconnection: 

When we have identities are worldviews that are centered around the idea of competition and differentiation from others to prove ourselves special or worthy, this tends to lead into hegemonic thinking more generally. And this creates a dynamic where we feel disconnection from the rest of humanity, nature, and reality at large.

And it leaves us in a state of starvation for connection where we feel like an island unto ourselves and totally disconnected from the whole of reality. And this produces feelings of shame... and a desire to differentiate ourselves further to prove ourselves valid and valuable.

And in this compensatory differentiation, we end up creating lots of arbitrary separations within ourself and outside of ourselves... and it strengthens the perception of self and other.

This lead us to project a hierarchy of value onto existence itself where we start believing that "people who have x qualities are more valid that people who have y qualities."

And if these hierarchies of value involve collective identities... that is often weaponized by the demagogue who wants to say, "You are part of the chosen people" and "You are special because you exist."

And there's a huge need to be able to feel valid simply because we exist. But there's often a demographic quality that gets placed as the qualifier to differentiate the worthy and unworthy... like race, ethnic group, religion, gender, etc.

But all of these comes from seeing one's self as separate from everything else... and trying to prove one special enough within the hierarchy compared to others to justify one's own existence and overcome shame and disconnection through "proving one's self worthier than others."

Reason #3 - Projection of shame onto a scapegoat: 

Similar to the transference of the feelings of resentment towards the authoritarian parent onto a scapegoated group, there's the projection of one's own personal shame onto a scapegoated group.

This gives the person/group the ability to wash one's own self clean of sins by projecting them onto the scapegoated other.

If you're on the left (one of the scapegoated groups of the authoritarian right), you will see a dynamic that's referred to as "every accusation is a confession."

It's projecting one's own perceived sins onto the scapegoated other... and then removing or killing the scapegoated other to further "purify" one's own self of sin and the shame that comes with it.

Reason #4 - Economic powerlessness (and blaming and retaliating against a scapegoat to feel more empowered): 

When we feel powerless to a macrocosmic dynamic (like economic problems), it can feel empowering and relieving to have someone that's less powerful that you are to blame.

If you blame the macrocosmic dynamic of economic problems themselves, you can't retaliate with violence against those problems to feel power over them.

If you blame the politicians and powerful people for these problems, these are also out of reach. So, you can't easily retaliate with violence against those powerful people to feel more empowered. And if you do succeed, you will be in a world of hurt because they have more power than you.

If you blame those who are already vulnerable AND you live in an authoritarian Fascist society that enables violence against those vulnerable groups... you're able to feel empowered by victimizing the less powerful other. And that retaliation feels like a solution to the powerlessness... especially if the scapegoated other is being blamed for economic anxieties.

This is also true for other types of macrocosmic distress that are not specifically economic... like pandemics, wars, political upheavals, cultural changes, etc. 

Reason #5 - Unmet needs for limitation and contraction: 

In one of my medicine journeys, it showed me that the function of dictatorship is to create limitation in a top-down authoritarian way when the populace has a need for limitation... but can't consciously admit to that need and choose their own limits from a sovereign place.

Similar to a child that doesn't know their own limits, they need a parental figure to come in and do it for them.

And right now, there's so much rapid expansion and SO MUCH information that's readily available to use with the current state of the internet. And it's overwhelming and causes a lot of distress. 

The same thing happened when the printing press was invented. We were flooded with more information than EVER before. And this led to the arise of authoritarian movements... as people always consciously or unconsciously clamor for authoritarians to set limits when we aren't consciously feeling able to narrow our own aperture of exposure to catalysts of expansion (like educational materials, new perspectives, abundance of money, abundance of freedom, etc.)

So, one of the best things we can do in order to let go of the collective demand for authoritarianism is to help people set boundaries and limits based on their own sovereign preferences.

The main thing standing in the way of that is that contemporary humans have many paradigms that prize expansion over contraction. So, many people are unconscious to the fact that they feel over-expanded... as they see expansion as an unquestioned good and contraction as a unquestioned bad.

Reason #6 - Abdication of personal responsibility: 

Being an underling of an authoritarian regime confers a major benefit... and that is to relinquish responsibility for one's own actions... and to give that responsibility over to a PERFECT source of authority that is greater than one's self.

People also tend to do this with their God image... as it is a basic human need to be able to "give things up to the higher power".

But with authoritarian governments (and cults), there is a tendency to make the authoritarian leader as the higher power itself. So, there is a tendency to give one's own sense of sovereignty and personal responsibility over to the authoritarian "Big Brother" figure... and see the Big Brother as perfect and Godlike.

And this assures people that it's okay to give up their power and the responsibility that comes with it... as it feels safer to "just follow orders" given the absolute Godlike perfection projected onto the authoritarian leader.

That's why, during the Nuremberg trials, lots of people who went to trial tried to give the defense as "We were just following orders."

They believed they would be inoculated from the responsibility for their own actions because they were "just following orders" set by the leader.

So, they expect the leader to take all the blame and responsibility if something goes wrong. And they project that the leader is perfect... so nothing will go wrong as long as they follow orders.

Likewise, there's also the abdication of responsibility onto the scapegoated other where the scapegoated other is to blame for all of the problems of the dominant group. So, it enables victim's mentality, self-pity, and a total release of personal responsibility because "they are to blame for all the problems".

---

Solutions:

With regard to solutions for this, the number one preventative solution is for society at large to discourage authoritarian parenting... as this is one of the main roots causes. That's a more long-range preventative project.

But in terms of more current solutions, the more we encourage eye-to-eye human connection... and an embrace of ordinary common humanity, the better.

And a big part of this is to help people depolarize from hierarchical identities of being above or below other people.... both collectively and individually.

And a big part of this is helping people recognize that humans are ordinary parts of nature just like all other creatures on the planet. We are not extraordinary animals that rule from outside of the circle of life... we are ordinary animals that exist as one of many peripheral aspects of the circle of life.

This breaking down of the myth of human specialness, national/racial specialness, and even meritocratic specialness is what humbles us and brings us back into a state of interconnection with humanity, nature, and reality at large. And we feel at home and like we don't have to compete with others to prove ourselves individually or collectively special enough to exist.

---

What would I do if I was Trump?

What Trump's goal is, is to be validated by others as a special and significant person who's more important than others. So, he wants validation AND he wants power... which further cements his identity of significance and specialness compared to all other people.

My goal (as Trump) would be to continue grand-standing as an absolute authority and never show any sign of faltering or making mistakes. That will ensure that people with traumas from being raised by authoritarian parents will continue to project absolute authority onto me. Showing uncertainty of any kind is a no no!

Also, I'd continue scapegoating groups of people... as that will divide the populace and make them easier to control. And it will create more allegiance to me among the group of people traumatized by authoritarian parenting... who will then self-police the working class population from within by dominating their neighbors and trying to be the tallest kid in kindergarten.

What I would do that Trump isn't already doing (and likely isn't capable of doing), is to be more strategic about power grabs. Trump just seeks power like a heat seeking missile seeks heat. But he will go for the quickest route to power from where he is. But this causes him to make a lot of mistakes... and undermine his power sometimes because he only thinks 1 or 2 steps ahead, instead of thinking 10 steps ahead.

Edited August 18 by Emerald

[sholomar]

Trump, despite the good things he has done, is still a spiral dynamics stage blue/orange. It's impossible for him to act outside his stage so the argument is moot.   He definitely has a big ego, and he's not going to release the Epstein files because literally every powerful person on both the left and right is on it, in every country. The dirty little secret of human nature is old men are attracted to teenage girls, and old powerful men with money will do anything to get access. They don't teach this stuff on TV, it's one of those things some of us just understand, and others are naive too.   Everyone has varying degrees of private lives they hide from others to avoid judgment and the consequences of going outside the polished cultural mores pushed by society at large.  Plenty of people cheat on their spouses and go against their supposed values in the heat of the moment, because those animal impulses are powerful and feel really good. 

This is why the left not going tough on crime doesn't work, because carrot and stick conditioning is required to modify behavior.. if you teach people they can get away with bad behavior, they will keep doing it.   In any case, the things mentioned in the first few posts here would go way above Trump's head. Asking a blue/orange to understand green/yellow is like trying to understand a foreign language. 

Nice post Emerald by the way. Amazing thought and time went into that. 

Edited August 18 by sholomar

[UnbornTao]

Hire a high-quality personal psychotherapist. 

[enchanted]

If I was forced to run as a conservative I'd embrace values of mental toughness, hard work, fiscal responsibility, community, healthy food, strong families. 

I'd spin every policy to make it sound traditional, family oriented, and religious. For example, provide maternity and paternity leave on the value of "strong famililes". I'd reduce pollution so our farmers can make healthy food for our kids. I'd tackle corporate greed using traditional religious values. I'd help the poor "as Jesus would have". I'd tax the rich using quotes from the Bible. Etc. 

Trump flipped the script and campaigned on a lot of ideas the left is to. Anything is possible, including conscious conservativism. 

Edited August 18 by enchanted

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, enchanted said:

If I was forced to run as a conservative I'd embrace values of mental toughness, hard work, fiscal responsibility, community, healthy food, strong families. 

I'd spin every policy to make it sound traditional, family oriented, and religious. For example, provide maternity and paternity leave on the value of "strong famililes". I'd reduce pollution so our farmers can make healthy food for our kids. I'd tackle corporate greed using traditional religious values. I'd help the poor "as Jesus would have". I'd tax the rich using quotes from the Bible. Etc. 

Trump flipped the script and campaigned on a lot of ideas the left is to. Anything is possible, including conscious conservativism. 

It's worth a shot. But I don't know if it would work very well as it isn't actually the positive values that sells a conservative candidate to voters. It's the emotions of fear, anger, and disgust that a candidate acts as a conduit for that attracts in voters.

Most conservative voters just aren't really psychologically attracted to positive values in and of themselves... even if you tie your platform to family values or Jesus' teachings.

It's more about what family values and Jesus' teachings gives them authoritative license to hate and to try to eradicate.

What really motivates most voters towards Trump in particular is the fact that Trump knows how to push their psychological buttons around their desires to externalize their negative feelings. And his emotional button-pushing allows them to feel like they're valued loyal foot soldiers to an absolute authority who are doing the right thing. And they get to feel they are vindicated victims and to name a universally reviled scapegoat.

Otherwise, the support for conservative politicians is tepid at best. Like, no one is obsessed with voting for a Romney-type or Huckabee-type. They mostly vote against what they hate in the culture... not for a politician or the positive things that politician will do for them, or how much that politician aligns with their positive values.

It's more like "The more a politician will rid the world of what I am disgusted by, the more enthusiastic I will be about voting for that politician."

Positive values and Golden Rule teachings are not a compelling emotional driver for those who feel chronically unsafe and ruled by fear of the other.

It's more of "This politician will purify the infections of society by removing or eradicating the people and elements of culture that make me feel unsafe and cause the culture to degenerate."

That's the motivating message... and Jesus and family values can be slapped as a label on top of it to help people hide their hatred from themselves.

[Leo Gura]

On 8/16/2025 at 11:25 PM, Apparition of Jack said:

Release the Epstein files.

Suicide it is 

[Leo Gura]

Retire to a Buddhist monastary.

[trenton]

I think a better way to phrase the question would be, "what would you do if you were in Trump's position?" If you say "what would you do if you were trump?" then the reality is that if I were Trump then I would be shamelessly corrupt to the point that I would be doing the exact same thing he is doing right now.

I think an important question is, if I were in Trump's position then does that include me having dementia along with all of his other mental health problems? If I do, then that would impede my ability to realistically think clearly and act in a positive manner.

I will assume I don't have dementia which is a big assumption.

With all of that in mind, if i were in Trump's position, then I would be inclined to resign from my position in the White House. This would be a big move especially if it is accompanied by admitting and taking responsibility for my corrupt actions, which would be a lot of actions while recognizing the harm caused to the world. The key point is that in the White House, I am dealing with something larger than myself and I will need to set aside my selfishness to do the right thing that would be best for humanity as a whole, even it might be costly to myself personally.

Obviously, the actual Trump would never do such a thing because he does not care about the wellbeing of the rest of the world. He only cares about himself and that is why he is so corrupt.

[Raze]

Force Israel to stop and Ukraine to agree to peace with Russia, force the UAE to stop in Somalia.

Increase taxes on the rich and use it to fund UBI, Medicare for all, and a rebuilding of US infrastructure.

Trump would be the most popular president in history, win a Nobel peace prize, and could have everything they rebuild be named after him and have statues of him everywhere.

[Schizophonia]

I am Trump

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

On 8/17/2025 at 7:27 AM, Innerview said:

The article mentions creating American Citizen Assemblies:

”Create panels of randomly selected, everyday Americans to tackle our toughest challenges—immigration, infrastructure, the national debt. Not politicians, not lobbyists, not pundits—real people finding common-sense solutions.”

But how can we trust every day people without expertise to make decisions on highly complicated topics?

Very good article btw.

That's an excellent question, Innerview, and it gets to the heart of how citizen assemblies are designed to succeed where traditional politics fails. The key is that these assemblies are not about asking random people to suddenly become experts in monetary policy or climate science.

Instead, they are carefully structured processes designed to combine the common sense and lived experience of everyday people with the specialized knowledge of experts.

Here’s how it works:

1. Access to World-Class, Unbiased Expertise
   The first phase of any citizen assembly involves a "learning period". Assembly members are presented with clear, unbiased information from a wide range of leading experts and stakeholders on the topic. For an assembly on the national debt, they would hear from top economists, social workers, business owners, and historians, not just lobbyists with a prepared script. This gives them a comprehensive and balanced understanding of the issue.
2. Facilitated, Deliberative Dialogue
   The assemblies are not chaotic free-for-alls. They are run by professional, neutral facilitators whose job is to ensure a respectful, productive, and in-depth dialogue. This process allows members to work through the complex information they've learned, challenge their own assumptions, and find common ground. This model is inspired by successful real-world examples, like Ireland’s Citizens’ Assembly, and is a core component of the "Meta-Governance Framework" of the GGF I'm working on.
3. Focus on Values and Principles, Not Technical Details
   The most important point is that the assembly's primary role is to determine the values, principles, and trade-offs that should guide policy. They answer the "why" and the "what," not the "how."

For example, on the national debt, their final recommendation wouldn't be a 500-page bill. It would be a set of guiding principles like:

• "We believe it is essential to reduce the national debt, but not at the cost of pushing our most vulnerable citizens into poverty."
• "We recommend a balanced approach that combines moderate spending cuts with closing tax loopholes for large corporations."

These value-based recommendations are then handed over to policy experts and public servants to draft the detailed technical legislation. This process combines the democratic legitimacy and common-sense wisdom of the people with the technical expertise of specialists, getting the best of both worlds.

[Bjorn K Holmstrom]

I want to thank you all for a rich and insightful discussion! This is the kind of deep, systemic thinking I was hoping to spark.

Emerald, your analysis in both of your posts was exceptional and hit the nail on the head. You brilliantly articulated the core challenge and the primary blind spot of this "trojan horse" strategy: it's a positive, logical plan aimed at addressing grievances that are often fueled by non-logical, negative emotions like fear, shame, and disgust. Your breakdown of the roots of authoritarianism is a powerful framework in itself.

This is the crucial missing piece. It's not enough to design a better system; that system must also account for the deep psychological needs and collective trauma at play. You've helped me refine the central question from "What's a better plan?" to "How can a systems-level plan also serve as a container for collective healing?". I'm now exploring this further.

Enchanted, thank you for the "conscious conservatism" frame. It is a great way to explore this idea of strategic reframing.

Sholomar and Trenton, I appreciate your perspectives on Trump's character and capacity. To clarify, my thought experiment was less about trying to literally change Trump, and more about asking: if one had that position of influence, how could a different strategy be deployed to reach the people who feel seen by him? It’s more about the position than the person. I recognize that the thread title and perhaps the blog post title as well are a bit misleading.

Thank you all again. This has been very helpful in deepening the strategy.

Edited August 20 by Bjorn K Holmstrom

[DocWatts]

Drop dead of congestive heart failure.

Cults tends to fracture and die without their charismatic leader, and Trump is too much of an abusive narcissist to appoint a successor.

[Elliott]

Theres no need to propose a logical plan for republicans, there's no rationalizing with them: just run as a Republican and lie to them, they love that. Just lie to them, and run as Republican.

I would do the Democrats policy; publicly value education and Americans, basic infrastructure and schools in poor communities, no American should be homeless: build basic housing for the mentally ill and the people down on their luck with other problems, public addiction recovery, regulate pollution.

Edited August 23 by Elliott

[Razard86]

I would rather title this what would you do if you were Trump with memory of the current you. Because if you were truly Trump you would do exactly what Trump is doing right now. But if I were Trump with memory of my current self I would make an effort to heavily invest my time in evidence based practices and educating myself on what I don't know instead of making decisions purely based on assumptions

[Basman]

Trump's issue as an authoritarian ideologue is that he is incompetent. He doesn't have any real strategy or plan, is addicted to drama and can't take advice. 

If Trump was conscious and competent he would first and foremost just have invested his inheritance into index funds. He would be richer now than if he made a bunch of businesses. He'd be less status chasing. Trump idealizes Putin because he perceives Putin to be a part of a prestigious society of autocrats which he wants to be part of. If Trump was competent he would have stalled on the issue of the Epstein files indefinitely. There's no reason why he actually had to make an official statement. He could've just made up some excuse why they can't be released "just yet" when questioned. 

[Elliott]

Stephen Miller is the strategist, he probably didn't know trump was in the files and let Bondi , Kash, and bongino continue the maga conspiracies which backed them into a bit of a corner.

Republicans aren't bright at all, Trump throws any shred of dirt at anybody, YET he was never the one to bring up epstein to attack people, he only replied with attacks when others brought up epstein. He would have given everyone epstein nicknames.

Edited August 24 by Elliott