New York Times columnist David Brooks' recent Atlantic essays He lamented the corrosion of American moral fabrics. Of course, Donald Trump is responsible.
Trump's “narcissistic nihilism” argues that it is driven by a single philosophy: “Morality is morality for suckers.” Christian virtues are for the weak. Nietzsche's pagan power, courage and glory are worthy of the winner. And while many of Trump's administrations “have a cross on their chest,” they have “the Nietzsche of their hearts.” This “fatal cocktail” transformed America from the “power for incredible good” placed on the co on January 20, 2025, into an unrecognizable entity, according to Brooks.
Trump's appeal to many was not that he embodied his virtue. Rather, he had promised to protect what remained in the institution that enabled virtue.
Brooks wasn't the first to cast such accusations against the President, but certainly he does so to tickle my philosophical fantasies. America's moral decline was a matter of concern long before Trump took office.
But is Trump, or a single political leader really responsible?
Politics follows culture
Like many veterans in the political class, Brooks places too much faith in the system. Both parties are clinging to the illusion of comfort that culture flows downstream from politics. Even honest conservatives who spend plenty of time in the DC bubble begin to believe that choosing the “right” people or passing the “right” law can do more than governance.
But moral weight is no equally stupid to a policy of pretending. Ask anyone who truly lived under a corrupt regime. Still, culture shapes politics rather than worrying about Washington bureaucrats accept it.
Diagnosing America's cultural decline requires more than just olding a single president or passing a bill. This means examining the social landscape that created such politics in the first place. To understand Washington, we must first look to the souls of voters who send their leaders there.
Yes, speaking of the “soul” of the nation, it puts the painting at risk with its wide strokes at the expense of nuance. Even Brooks probably admits this. Americans are desperately reaching out to the moral touchstones that culture once favored. These touchstones – faith, family, tradition – were demolished by the very ideologues Trump was elected to oppose.
From disillusionment
Brooks admits to the bits of truth, and admits that Left has constructed a “suffering, suffocating orthodox.” However, his diagnosis barely touches on the depths of America's moral confusion.
More than 40 years ago, Alasdair Macintyre warned that “post virtue” that modern society had hampered the moral framework necessary to make moral language consistent. Today we are still calling that language – justice, dignity, meaning – but there is no shared foundation under it. Efforts to rebuild these foundations now face open hostility.
When public figures like Jordan Peterson face denunciations to revive the moral leadership that was once common in homes, churches and civic life, it reveals the darkness. Americans have lost access to the moral raw materials needed to build meaningful lives.
Trump's appeal never rested on personal virtue. It was on his willingness to defend the institutions that enabled virtue. To millions of voters, he stood as a breakwater against moral collapse – not a saint, but a guardian of sacred ground. That's why he gained him the loyalty of Americans who were disillusioned by the left-wing attacks on the moral structures he once relied on.
The government's job is not to redeem the soul. It is about protecting the conditions in which people can pursue good, truth, and prosperous lives. It means protecting the cultural space where moral frameworks can take root, and ensuring that the destroyer does not tear it apart.
Brooks calls this “narcissistic nihilism.” In reality, it is much more rare: hope – hope that virtues can still grow in the remaining soil.
