The Dangers of Authoritarian Leaders: Comparing Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump

In recent years, the world has seen some of its most powerful nations led by controversial and potentially dangerous leaders. Two names often come to mind: Kim Jong-un of North Korea and Donald Trump of the United States. Both are divisive figures with starkly different leadership styles and an impact on global politics. Is one more dangerous than the other, and why?

The Cult Following and Howard's Criticism

Howard, a strong critic of Donald Trump, argues that the ex-president is prone to admiring unscrupulous leaders like Kim Jong-un. Howard points to Trump's evident admiration for Kim Jong-un, referencing him as a aspiring role model for what Howard believes Trump would have become had he succeeded in his attempts to take power through a coup or insurrection. Howard asserts that Trump is not well-suited for the presidency and criticizes his financial instability, arguing that this compromised him to support Russia over the interests of the United States. He terms Trump a traitor and considers him exceptionally foolish.

The Insidious Impact of Authoritarian Leaders

While both Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump represent authoritarian leadership, it's worth exploring the specific dangers each poses. Howard characterizes them as equally horrible, with different methods of undermining their respective nations.

Howard emphasizes that while both leaders are problematic, he personally believes Trump is far worse primarily due to the immense power that America wields. The assertion is that a mad ruler in a superpower nation could cause far more global damage. Trump, Howard argues, has done more damage in the aggregate globally.

The Immediacy of Danger

Howard acknowledges that the threat posed by each leader is an existential one. He opines that it's not an easy question and that it ultimately boils down to proximity. The closer a dangerous leader is, the more immediate and tangible the danger. To illustrate this, Howard employs a simple analogy: the closer a ‘turd’ is, the more likely you are to smell it. This reflects the physical closeness of danger in terms of geography and influence.

However, Howard also acknowledges that the comparison is far from straightforward.

“It's a toss-up!” Howard admits. “But I think Trump has done more damage in total around the world.”

Explicit and Implicit Threats

Donald Trump, during his tenure as President of the United States, left a lasting legacy of divisiveness, including a variety of social, political, and economic issues. The underlying theme was a blurring of lines between truth and fiction, manipulation of information, and a general erosion of democratic norms.

On the other hand, North Korea under Kim Jong-un has depicted a historically-demanding environment, where foreign relations are often marked by suspicion, ill-will, and nuclear threats. This combination makes North Korea a significant threat to international peace and security.

Both leaders have their unique set of challenges. While Trump's immediate influence is waning, the long-term effects of his policies continue to be felt. Kim Jong-un, with his totalitarian grip and recent technological advancements, remains a considerable threat to regional and global stability.

A Call for Responsibility and Accountability

The passage highlights the critical role leadership plays in shaping the future of nations and the world. It underscores the responsibilities that come with holding positions of great power. Leaders who prioritize ideology over the well-being of their citizens and the global community are a threat to peace and stability.

Both Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump represent cautionary tales of leaders who have strayed from democratic principles and have potentially devastating impacts. It is essential for the international community to remain vigilant and work towards promoting and protecting democratic governance, human rights, and the rule of law.