History often holds warnings for the present, and the story of Caligula, the infamous Roman emperor, provides one such cautionary tale. Caligula centralized power in himself and destroyed what was left of the Roman Republic. Some observers suggest parallels with Donald Trump, who, during his second term, could continue to weaken U.S. institutions by appointing controversial figures to key government positions. While Trump doesn’t need to go as far as making a horse a senator, his choices could drastically reshape the government in ways that alarm critics.
Trump’s Appointments: Controversy and Consequences
Pete Hegseth for the Pentagon
Trump’s pick to lead the U.S. military bureaucracy, Pete Hegseth, has been criticized for his far-right Christian nationalist views. Hegseth’s role, according to reports, would focus on removing military leaders seen as disloyal to Trump, raising concerns about political interference in the armed forces.
Matt Gaetz for Attorney General
Matt Gaetz, Trump’s choice for U.S. attorney general, has faced legal scrutiny, including allegations of sex trafficking (which he denies). Critics worry Gaetz could use the role to target Trump’s opponents, undermining the impartiality of the Department of Justice.
Tulsi Gabbard for Intelligence Chief
Trump has proposed Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic lawmaker with ties to controversial views on Russia, to oversee U.S. intelligence. Her positions, including accusations that the U.S. has secret bioweapons labs in Ukraine, have raised fears about national security risks and damage to alliances.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health and Human Services
Kennedy, a prominent vaccine critic, has been nominated to head the Department of Health and Human Services. His anti-vaccine stance, which predates COVID-19, has alarmed public health experts who warn that his leadership could reverse decades of progress in fighting diseases like measles, smallpox, and polio.
Reform or Deconstruction?
Trump’s “Department of Government Effectiveness” (DOGE), led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, aims to reform bureaucracy. However, critics argue the plan lacks seriousness, pointing out that both Musk and Ramaswamy have limited understanding of how the government functions. Observers warn that instead of improving efficiency, the initiative might spread misinformation, much like Musk’s social media platform X.
Meanwhile, Trump’s broader goal, as outlined by his former strategist Steve Bannon, is to “deconstruct the administrative state.” This includes dismantling federal agencies and reducing regulatory oversight, which could leave the next administration with a fractured government.
What’s at Stake?
While the U.S. has survived Trump’s first term, the long-term damage to institutions could worsen in a second term. Critics worry about the erosion of public trust, the weakening of safeguards like the independent judiciary, and the replacement of expert leaders with loyalists. Trump’s economic policies could also lead to political backlash in future elections, but the question remains: what condition will the federal government be in by then?
History reminds us that empires and republics can decline not through external threats, but through internal decay. As the United States navigates this pivotal moment, the lessons of Rome’s rapid fall may feel closer to home than ever.