The Human Cost of Bad Government

 Donald Trump, the current president, has been widely criticized and strongly disliked by many. Some of these reactions may stem from his behavior and rhetoric, which many view as insulting or inappropriate, while others may reflect broader differences in political worldview. Past Democratic presidents, such as Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have also faced intense criticism, though much of that opposition has often been rooted in differing political perspectives.

Whatever one’s political position, the gravest danger arises when power is concentrated in the hands of a single ruler, ruling party, or unaccountable regime. Absolute monarchies, one-party states, dictatorships, and tyrannical governments can strip away legal protections and leave citizens dependent on the will of those in power.

Unchecked Power and Its Risks

Unchecked power allows a ruler or ruling party to control law, punishment, property, and political life without meaningful restraint. When there are no independent courts, free institutions, or reliable checks and balances, political opponents, dissenters, advisers, and ordinary citizens can become vulnerable to imprisonment, exile, or death at the discretion of those in authority.

Historical Example: King Henry VIII

King Henry VIII of England is often cited as a historical example of out-of-control authoritarian power in practice. He ordered the deaths of political opponents, religious dissenters, trusted advisers such as Thomas More, and two of his wives. It is estimated that Henry had over 76,000 of his citizens put to death just at his whim. His reign shows how unchecked authority can transform personal, religious, or political conflict into matters of life and death.

Modern Examples of Authoritarian Rule

Modern authoritarian regimes continue to illustrate the dangers of concentrated power. Frequently cited examples include:

• North Korea: Kim Jong Un’s government has been accused of ordering executions, imprisonment, and severe punishment against officials and citizens who fall out of favor. Just recently Kim had a North Korean official executed just for falling asleep in a meeting.  Hyon Yong-chol: South Korea's National Intelligence Service (NIS) reported that North Korea's Defense Minister was executed in April 2015 for falling asleep at a military event attended by Kim Jong-un and for failing to follow instructions.  

•  Russia: Vladimir Putin’s government has been widely criticized for the persecution and deaths of political opponents, including Alexei Navalny who was killed while in prison.  Yevgeny Prigozhin, the former leader of the mercinary Wagner Group was killed in an airplane crash believed to have been intentionally sabotaged so it would crash. Very frequently we hear of certain people who have fallen out of favor with Putin fall out of apartment windows and killed.

• China: Critics argue that those who fall out of favor with the ruling party may face imprisonment, political prosecution, or severe punishment. Examples often mentioned include Hong Kong businessman Jimmy Lai.  Lai was imprisoned just for not bending to the will of the tyrant and defending truth. Military leaders Wei Fenghe and Li Shangfu, who have have been accused of corruption. This cannot be verified; they may have just fallen out of favor. In such systems, punishment can appear to depend less on independent legal judgment than on decisions made by those in power.
• Iran: As you may have heard, the tyrannical Iranian regime murdered over an estimated 40,000 peaceful protesters at the beginning of 2026. 

Together, these examples highlight a central concern: when political power is concentrated in one leader or ruling party, individual rights and personal safety depend less on impartial law and more on the preferences of those who control the state.

In the former Byzantine Empire, for example, an emperor could order the punishment or execution of anyone perceived as an opponent, whether the threat was real or imagined. Blinding was one especially notorious form of punishment. Again, the decision rested not with an independent judge or jury, but with the ruler’s will.  Byzantine emperors frequently blinded political rivals, rebels, and suspected usurpers. This brutal practice was used to neutralize threats to the throne while technically sparing their lives, as Byzantine religious and political laws strictly prohibited anyone with a physical defect or mutilation from ruling the empire.

In 11^th century Sicily, the conquering Normans introduced a feudal system in which the king claimed ultimate ownership of the land. Under this arrangement, ordinary people had limited property rights and depended on the ruler’s authority to determine who could use or lease land. This was basically a form of slavery, the lands were divided into large fiefs ruled by the upper-class barons, who ruled their fiefs with an iron hand. If a peasant hired by the baron wanted to improve the property he had to have permission from the baron.  If he needed a loan, the barons would force him to only borrow from them at exorbitant rates.  private bank loans were prohibited. 

In our current day, we have one-party states such as in California, Vermont, Oregon, Washington and other states where one party has a majority in both houses and passes laws at will.  The minority has, basically, no voice. The main difference is that we have a judiciary that makes the ultimate rule, however, even the courts are skewed to the left such as the notorious 9^th Circuit Court which usually rubber stamps leftist laws. For decades, the court was known as a reliably liberal stronghold. The Supreme Court reverses the Ninth Circuit in approximately 79% to 80% of the cases it agrees to review, which historically amounts to roughly 10 to 14 reversals per term. This is one of the highest raw reversal rates and totals in the country. 

“Peace in our Time” Obama and the Coming Iranian Train Wreck

Within a few days of my first piece on this blog, “Why History is Important,” I received my December 7, 2009 issue of “The Weekly Standard” magazine. Upon opening the magazine I found a story written by a German political scientist, Matthias Küntzel, titled “Obama’s Search for Peace in Our Time.” The article is an uncanny comparison to what I discussed in “Why History is Important” and why we will repeat history rather than learn from it. It looks like President Obama either has not studied history, or has failed to learn from it. Click on the link above to read this important article.

The Küntzel piece details the history of how the “5 +1” powers, France, Britain, China, Russia + Germany and the United States have appeased Iran for the last 10 years and how the Iranians have played the “5+1” powers like a champion yoyo player rocks the baby. Küntzel is especially hard on his own country, Germany, on how they have impeded any sanctions for their friends, the Iranians.

Just when the Europeans were tired of Iran’s intransigence and wished to start meaningful sanctions, the United States got a new President, Barack Obama, who’s strategy is to appease, be nice, apologize and twist himself into a pretzel just to gain favor with the Iranian thugs and world opinion. To quote Küntzel: “Whereas George Bush denounced the Islamism of the Iranian regime, his successor attempts to ingratiate himself by offering compliments and apologies. Whereas before it was the Europeans who packaged their failures as successful “dialogue,” now it is Washington that does it.” This is no surprise since Obama campaigned on the promise of being anti-war, anti-Bush and so convinced of his ability to convince anybody that he will hold out till hell freezes over for negotiating with Iran to stop their nuclear program. As with our friends and neighbors, some people will never learn; the only problem is that when the leader of the strongest nation in the world does it, we will pay a heavy price.