How can we explain the ease with which Trump has been able to bully big business and major universities into surrendering whatever integrity they claim to have had? Part of the answer lies in the nature of the institutions themselves.
Corporations are legal persons but they are not human beings. They are not moral beings and do not have a conscience. They cannot feel emotions and have no ability to experience or recognize guilt. Whatever morality or ethical standard a corporation appears to possess is derived from its human leadership, whose influence is temporary, lasting only during their tenure.
Standards of behavior with any semblance of permanence or morality exist only through government enforcement. This creates a competitive environment where corporate leaders and their agents strive to minimize regulations that hinder their ability to operate as they see fit, often without regard for the common good or national welfare. Securing special privileges or benefits for the corporation is even more desirable but increases vulnerability to the political whims of persons in high office.
CEOs are legally accountable for operating within regulatory limits, but their compensation is primarily tied to shareholder return on investment. This metric, more important than profitability, is enforced by compensation packages linked to stock prices and stock options. It creates a powerful incentive to subordinate everything else to personal financial reward. It partially explains why major corporate CEOs have been willing to challenge Trump only when the disruptive impact of tariffs posed a greater threat to their financial interests than the destruction of the government’s ability to serve the needs of the people.
Major universities represent a different scenario. Unlike major corporations, they are part of a centuries-long tradition that emphasizes ethical and moral values as guiding principles. They justifiably pride themselves on becoming world-leading research institutions and providers of advanced education. However, it has come at a cost. They depend heavily on federal grants, often amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars funding their cutting-edge research. It’s a beneficial symbiotic relationship as long as both parties operate in good faith. But it makes them vulnerable to political pressure, as demonstrated by their willingness to compromise ethical principles when funding is threatened.
Universities could uphold that tradition if their leadership were unified in the moral courage to collectively resist the Trump administration’s bad-faith immorality. However, the administration’s “divide and conquer” tactics have proven effective; university presidents and boards of trustees have demonstrated a lack of moral fortitude. While they may eventually reclaim their roles as ethical and moral leaders in society, their weak knees and drooping hands are shameful.
We cannot depend on major corporations and universities to do the right thing. Fortunately, other actors, formal and informal associations dedicated to building up a stronger and more just society, are the defenders of liberal democracy and hope for a better, more promising future. They are more independent of government control and not as vulnerable to financial ruin, represent the needs and interests of individuals and advocate for public policies that promote the common good and general welfare. They are numerous and diverse, with shifting alliances based on specific policy goals.
What distinguishes them from corporate interests is their ethical foundation. Beyond financial responsibility, their accountability stems from those they represent and the needs they articulate. The primary measures of success are: whether their voices are heard, whether they exert real influence, and whether they make a tangible difference. These outcomes are based on trust, acknowledging that progress may alternate with setbacks, but sustained commitment ensures future gains.
The millions who participated in the April 5th demonstrations exemplify their power. Their activities include campaigns to flood politicians’ offices with calls and emails, organize support for candidates, and expose the cruelty of oppressive policies and violations of human and civil rights. Their continued success hinges on maintaining momentum and resisting complacency. April 5 was a great start and now the hard work begins.
Let’s use MAGA as a standard to measure the significance of the April 5th demonstrations.
MAGA is a charismatic movement that reappropriates the history of American “revivalist” movements through resentment-driven politics. This reactive collapse of “religion” and “politics” enables millions of Americans to displace the depth of their despair by placing their “trust” in Donald Trump.
And the April 5th demonstrations?
To be more than cosplay virtue signaling, the episodic turn-out on a single day must be able to transform itself into a counter-movement to MAGA. The last such counter-movement was the Civil Rights movement.
Where today is the Gandhi-inspired Martin Luther King to organize and lead such a counter-movement?
Where are the institutions (e.g. MLK’s Black Church) for such a leader to tap into as a reservoir of mutual trust and the inspired willingness to suffer for something more important than you?
MAGA’s millions are deluded about the “solution” for their despair, but they are not wrong that there are deep-seated reasons prompting that despair.
As the country lurches from one Trump-inspired disaster to another, and the consumer confidence necessary to drive the consumer spending that constitutes more than 60% of the American economy fatally collapses—well, then, and perhaps only then, will there be a “revolt.”
Let’s hope that revolt takes place in time to influence the 2026 mid-terms.
The Trump administration inherited a robust economy.
In eleven short weeks he and they erased 16% of my wife’s and my life’s savings. It rebounded a bit, to “ONLY” 11%, but it is vulnerable to the whims of the President. Last Sunday billionaire Treasury Secretary Bessent told the nation on Meet the Press that the losses people are seeing in their life’s savings were “likely not significant.” He apparently has no understanding of how a population’s reduced personal assets affect consumption or how the velocity of money affects an economy.
We are in our 70’s and will never recover. And now we must worry that the administration will raid Social Security and Medicare.
The President is clearly acting without any understanding of economic consequences—but sells the impossibly rosy future of increasing manufacturing to the gullible. Remember he also sold bonds in the Taj in New Jersey…then walked away from the obligations in bankruptcy.
Even if Trump’s fantasy of reshoring manufacturing is successful, the process will take years, driven by robot technology and AI, not production labor. Incremental increases in manufacturing will have limited impact on GDP—services (design, engineering, research, consulting, IT, AI, etc.) account for 76% of US GDP.
The tariffs Trump imposed under an illegal and bogus declaration of national emergency must be reversed by Congress. It gave away the authority to levy tariffs embedded in the Constitution. Peter Navarro, Trump’s tariff guru, is a fraud, citing a fictional economist and author (an anagram of his name) countless times to support his grossly errant thinking, flawed formula, and bad arithmetic, making the world the victim of his deceit. He advises an inept president with a shallow understanding of global economics seemingly preoccupied with how he looks on TV as a game show host. Tariffs are an unforced error with tragic implications.
Surely the Dems can find the few votes in both houses to reverse these tariffs among the 60 House Rs with slim margins of victory in 2024. Midwestern Senators—the office-holders most prone to thinking in intellectually honest terms—whose seats are up in 2027 should also be invited to “come over to reality.” Dems need to find ways to insulate those Rs who want to do what is right for the nation but who feel jittery about primaries and Musk money.
This so-called economic war prosecuted by tariffs is unwinnable by any nation. And if there’s a global recession, who will buy the goods Trump sees the US exporting with its expanded manufacturing prowess?