Observing a recurring shadow in Western history—and what it means for America's present crisis
---
There is a pattern I cannot unsee.
It is not a perfect cycle. History is not a clock. But every hundred years or so, when the Western experiment in universal law and civic order exhausts itself, a particular figure emerges from the margins. Not a traditional king or emperor. Something older. Something that was supposed to have been left behind in the forests of Germania.
A chieftain.
Napoleon Bonaparte, 1804. Adolf Hitler, 1933. Donald Trump, 2017.
Three figures, separated by a century's cadence. Three moments when the Roman structure of universal law, impartial institutions, and civic citizenship buckled under its own weight. Three eruptions of the Germanic tribal alternative—the chieftain who speaks not to citizens, but to his tribe; who wields not the authority of an office, but the loyalty of his war-band; who promises not justice under law, but restoration through conquest.
I am a Black American man. My ancestors were the capital upon which this nation's Germanic-Roman experiment was built—the human currency traded between tribes, the bodies over which the universal law and the local custom fought their endless war. Perhaps that vantage point lets me see the fire before others feel the heat. Perhaps it simply means I have always known this house was flammable.
Let me walk you through what I have come to understand.
---
The Three Faces of the Chieftain
Napoleon rose from the ashes of the French Revolution—that most ambitious attempt to build a society on pure Roman universalism. Liberty, equality, fraternity. Abstract citizenship. The rule of written law. But the revolution cannibalized itself, and into the vacuum stepped a Corsican artillery officer who crowned himself emperor. He did not restore the old monarchy. He created something new: a chieftain's empire draped in Roman robes. He appealed not to the "rights of man" but to French glory, French destiny, French tribal supremacy. He preserved the legal code while gutting the universalist spirit. His followers did not see themselves as submitting to a tyrant; they saw themselves as joining a warrior band restoring the tribe's honor.
Hitler emerged from the wreckage of the Weimar Republic—Germany's own attempt at Roman-style liberal democracy, born from defeat and burdened by humiliation. The universalist experiment never took root. The soil was too thin, the winter too cold. And so the chieftain came, explicitly, self-consciously, wielding the ancient Germanic mythology of blood and soil, Volk and Führer. He rejected the "decadent" Roman universalism of the republic as foreign, rootless, Jewish. He offered instead the warmth of the tribe, the clarity of the enemy, the ecstasy of collective restoration. His followers did not see themselves as surrendering their individuality; they saw themselves as free German warriors swearing a voluntary oath to the leader who would make them victorious.
Trump arrived at the exhaustion of the post-Cold War consensus—that brief, delusional moment when liberal democracy was declared the final form of human governance. But the Roman structure of American constitutionalism had been quietly eroding for decades. Economic dislocation. Demographic change. Cultural vertigo. The tribe that once saw itself as the unquestioned center of the nation began to feel like a besieged minority in its own country. And so the chieftain descended his golden escalator.
He did not speak like a president. He spoke like a warlord. The "deep state" was the alien system arrayed against the true people. The media was the enemy. The former president was not a political opponent but a criminal to be hunted. His followers did not see themselves as cultists; they saw themselves as patriots who had freely chosen their champion. Their loyalty was not submission; it was the highest expression of their individual will, pooled together into a collective force powerful enough to reclaim what was theirs.
The Pattern Beneath the Personalities
What connects these three men across two centuries is not identical ideology or equal depravity. Hitler industrialized genocide. Napoleon was a conqueror, not a systematic exterminator. Trump has, so far, operated within the bounds of institutional decay, not open terror. These differences matter, and to flatten them is to misunderstand history.
But the family resemblance is unmistakable—and it points to something structural in the Western political project.
The Roman-Germanic fusion that produced our modern nations was never stable. It was a marriage of convenience between two incompatible visions of human society:
· The Roman vision: Universal law, impersonal institutions, abstract citizenship, rule by written code. The state as an idea, not a person. Justice as blind.
· The Germanic vision: Tribal identity, personal loyalty, customary honor, rule by chieftain. The state as an extension of the leader's will. Justice as fidelity to one's own.
America, like France and Germany before it, attempted to synthesize these impulses. We would have a strong executive (Roman imperium) balanced by sovereign states (Germanic tribes). We would have a written Constitution (Roman lex) interpreted by local juries (Germanic custom). We would be e pluribus unum—one from many—without ever resolving whether the "one" or the "many" held ultimate allegiance.
For generations, the synthesis held—imperfectly, often brutally, but it held. The Civil War was the first great rupture, the Roman center crushing the Germanic rebellion. The Civil Rights Movement was the second, appealing to Roman universal law against Germanic local custom. Each time, the synthesis was repaired, the cracks plastered over, the tension driven underground.
But tension does not disappear. It gestates.
Every seventy to one hundred years, when the Roman universalist structures feel exhausted—when they produce humiliation, dislocation, or simply feel too cold and abstract—the Germanic tribal alternative re-emerges. A chieftain appears. He speaks the language of the tribe, not the state. He promises restoration, not reform. He offers warmth to his followers and fire to his enemies.
Napoleon. Hitler. Trump.
The pattern is not prophecy. It is pathology. A recurrent fever in the body of the West.
Is the Cycle Breakable?
The pattern suggests what comes next. Napoleon's cycle lasted fifteen years and ended in exile and the restoration of the old monarchies. Hitler's cycle lasted twelve years and ended in rubble, division, and a continent's solemn vow: never again.
We are eight years into this iteration. The house is burning. The question is whether this fire, like the others, must consume everything before the rebuilding can begin—or whether this generation can write a different ending.
That would require something unprecedented. Not just the defeat of this chieftain, but the resolution of the 1,500-year-old tension his rise exploits. A new synthesis that does not simply suppress the Germanic tribal impulse but actually integrates it into a genuinely universalist project—one that offers identity without exclusion, belonging without bigotry, strength without conquest.
Can such a thing exist? I do not know. But I know who has spent four centuries learning the blueprint of both the Roman promise and the Germanic betrayal. I know who has always lived in the gap between the universal law and the tribal practice. I know who has been the canary in this coal mine, generation after generation.
Perhaps the canary becomes the architect.
Perhaps the gray rock, under enough pressure, becomes a foundation stone.
Perhaps the people who were never meant to survive this house are the only ones who know how to build the next one.
Comments
Post a Comment