Witnessing the Regression of America
And the International Emotional Crises that Accompanies It (Vol. 5; Issue 39)
Maturity requires an ability to avoid the kind of splitting and projection discussed in the last few essays. Trump’s September 23rd UN speech contained precisely these primitive elements. But, how does one critique it without falling into the same archaic pattern? Doesn’t identifying him as a force moving history backwards involve just the kind of divisiveness mature people avoid?
Yes, it could. But, there is a way around it: Sideline Donald Trump as a person and, instead, highlight the meaning of Donald Trump as a symbol. The American people elected him president, and for the second time. Therefore, wherever he speaks and whatever he does, he represents all Americans. By emphasizing Trump’s symbolic rather than personal status, I attempt a mature, “all-in” perspective instead of the more regressive “us versus them” attitude.
Trump’s United Nations (UN) address overtly displayed what is meant by a regression into primitive ways of thinking and behaving. Instead of an American president calling for dialogue and forward-movement in world affairs, Trump did the opposite.* I focus on only two of the backsliding themes of his talk, namely what he said about climate change and the attacks he leveled at the UN itself.
In the speech before the 80th session of the United Nations, Trump called climate change “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world,” adding:
All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people that have cost their countries fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success.
These two sentences are entirely untrue. Most of the predictions were, in fact, accurate; errors in predicting the future can happen, of course, but not because of “stupid people.” Most individuals throughout the world understand, if not already experience, the effects of global warming. The report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (Stocker et al, 2023), a synthesis of 14,000 peer-reviewed research studies, presents a set of worst-case scenarios likely by 2100: The climate will warm by 8.5° C, destroying 99 percent of the world’s coral reefs, melting 80 percent of Alpine glaciers, and raising sea levels by three feet. By 2030, runaway meteorological events like heat waves, droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, and flooding will regularly occur.
The report, ironically a UN study itself, predicts that insufficient time remains to prevent the death of half of humanity. Many will die of malnutrition, heatstroke, or dehydration; crop failures, mass migrations, and military conflicts will kill others. Reports like this one, which synthesizes literally thousands of other studies, deserve attention. No one is served by insulting the authors or calling them “wrong.” Rather than climate-preserving actions costing “their countries fortunes,” failure to prevent further global warming will, in truth, cost countries billions of dollars.
After proclaiming he personally ended seven wars, including in “Cambodia and Thailand, Kosovo and Serbia, the Congo and Rwanda [and between ] Pakistan and India, Israel and Iran, Egypt and Ethiopia, and Armenia and Azerbaijan,” Trump proceeded to attack the UN. He said:
In all these cases, the United Nations did not even try to help… I ended seven wars, dealt with the leaders of each and every one of these countries, and never even received a phone call from the United Nations offering to help in finalizing the deal…
In actual fact, Trump played little or no role in ending these wars. For example, he hosted a meeting between the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan to celebrate the ceasefire their own leaders negotiated. Meanwhile, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s relentless attacks on Gaza continue unabated despite Trump’s intention to stop the former.
This particular excerpt from Trump’s UN speech reveals more distortions than lies. Like any political entity, the UN suffers from serious organizational defects. Arguably, its most significant problem lies with the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), which, by itself, impairs the UN’s effectiveness. Five permanent members, consisting of China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US, each holds veto power. Russia, for example, has repeatedly blocked resolutions condemning its invasion of Ukraine.
Nonetheless, the organization itself represents one of the most significant positive developments in human history. The idea of the UN, a body that invites countries around the world into dialogue, remains immeasurably valuable. Issues like preventing military conflicts or further damage to the climate serve everyone’s interest.
The UN emerged from the ashes of World War II as a successor to the League of Nations. The initial UN Charter set goals that included maintaining international peace and security, providing humanitarian aid, delivering emergency assistance, and promoting sustainable development. As of September 2025, the UN had 193 member states. UN peacekeeping forces prevent the escalation of hostilities in many parts of the world. Further evolutions in the structure of the UN will hopefully resolve its problem.
A milestone in the world’s history of human rights, the UN drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. The UDHR is widely recognized as paving the way for the adoption of more than 70 human rights treaties, which are applied at both global and regional levels. The document has been translated into some 500 languages.
The Preamble to the UDHR reads:
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.
Maturity involves the capacity for dialogue and for establishing mutually beneficial and reciprocal relationships. It involves, as the UDHR Preamble notes, honoring the dignity and rights of all inhabitants of our planet. Trump, as a powerful symbol of the American people, proclaims that we Americans have no intention of behaving as mature, consenting adults. His speech promotes a return to black-and-white, good-versus-bad, primitive thinking. Further, such messaging generates two significant emotional reactions that spread like shockwaves through the global population.
Many of us feel fear, if not terror, at the misleading and divisive nature of Trump’s UN speech. Issues like climate change affect us already—witness record heat waves, floods, and wildfires. It can be expected to have a more devastating impact as soon as 2030. What lies ahead for future generations is beyond frightening. Painfully obvious lies, such as calling climate change a “con job,” create waves of fear. Spreading untruths destroys trust in governmental entities, which, in turn, distresses the citizens of those governments.
Trump’s attacks on the UN, which include withdrawing financial support from the institution, similarly frightens people around the world. He repeatedly insulted the fragile organization that, despite its limitations, strives for peace. Trump’s heralding isolationism and tribalism instead of diplomacy and dialogue adds to the anxiety already felt by many worldwide.
For Americans, specifically, Trump’s behavior also elicits shame. Whether any particular individual voted for him or not, he is now the “voice of America.” The lies he told to the UN ambassadors, and his withering criticisms of the UN as a whole, make us all look bad. It was an outright humiliation for us to behold and endure.
Our president, speaking to the nations of the world, encouraged primitive regression. It took form as lies; it took form as an attack on the only body devoted to peacefully working out disputes between nations. Because of Trump’s power as the US president, those present for the speech behaved respectfully. But one cannot help but wonder: What did their “inside voices” tell them?
*CNN published a fact check of Trump’s UN speech here.
Enjoying this newsletter?
And check out my book, Lover, Exorcist, Critic: Understanding Depth Psychotherapy, available on Amazon.
References
Stocker, T.F., Qin, D., Plattner, G.K., Tignor, S.K, Allen, J., Boschung, A., Nauels Y., Xia, Y., Bex, V. and Midgley, P.M. (Eds.). (2023). IPCC Climate Change Report: The Physical Science Basis; A Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. New York: Cambridge University Press.