The Age of Force: Trump’s Second Term
In a chilling characterization of the Trump administration’s guiding philosophy, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller recently declared: “We live in a world that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power.” This stark worldview has manifested in both foreign and domestic policy during President Trump’s second term, transforming America’s approach to global relations and internal governance. What we’re witnessing is nothing short of a fundamental shift in American principles—from a nation built on laws and democratic values to one operating primarily through intimidation and coercion.
On the international stage, Trump’s America has embraced military aggression with alarming frequency. The administration conducted a military operation to capture Venezuela’s president while maintaining a naval blockade against the country’s oil trade. Within just the first year of Trump’s second term, the United States has carried out bombing campaigns in Nigeria, Somalia, Iran, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq. Even more concerning is the administration’s willingness to threaten traditional allies. The U.S. has issued warnings to Canada, Mexico, Colombia, and Cuba. Perhaps most shockingly, the administration is using military threats and punitive tariffs to pressure Denmark—a steadfast NATO ally—to sell Greenland to the United States. These actions represent a dramatic departure from diplomatic norms that have guided American foreign policy for generations.
Domestically, the same philosophy of force has taken root in American cities. Trump has deployed U.S. military personnel to Washington D.C., Portland, Chicago, Los Angeles, Memphis, and New Orleans, supplemented by thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. These ICE operations have become the embodiment of the Miller-Trump doctrine—what we might appropriately call “the ICE Age.” Agents operate like modern-day storm troopers: heavily armed, masked, traveling in unmarked vehicles, and hunting in coordinated groups. They strike swiftly and disappear, showing little restraint in their use of force. The human cost has been significant: thirty-two people died in ICE custody last year, one American mother was fatally shot, five U.S. citizens were shot while in their vehicles by immigration agents, and approximately 170 Americans were wrongfully arrested in ICE operations. For many citizens, the sight of ICE agents pursuing women, children, and students symbolizes a brutal new chapter in American governance where coercion has replaced the rule of law.
This philosophy of force extends beyond law enforcement to the accumulation of wealth and the elimination of political opposition. Using presidential power as leverage, Trump has reportedly amassed billions through various channels: promoting his cryptocurrency ventures, filing lawsuits against media companies, blocking business mergers, extracting payments from attorneys, pardoning wealthy donors, trading favorable tariff treatments for financial tributes, and positioning his children in businesses receiving federal funds. Those who refuse to participate in this system find themselves excluded from influence or worse. When Republican representatives Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, and Marjorie Taylor Greene challenged the president, Trump swiftly destroyed their political careers. The administration has taken even more dramatic steps against perceived enemies, arresting New York Attorney General Letitia James, former FBI Director James Comey, and former National Security Advisor John Bolton. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell now faces similar targeting by federal agents. Most disturbing is the celebration of the January 6 Capitol insurrection, which has been reframed as a legitimate expression of political will rather than a violent attack on democratic institutions.
Some Americans may find themselves drawn to this style of “strong leadership” and an aggressive foreign policy stance. However, this approach raises profound questions about America’s moral standing and legal consistency. A government that justifies its actions solely through force abandons any legitimate basis for objecting when others employ similar tactics. Having praised those who violently attacked Congress, how can Trump credibly condemn violence directed at federal agencies like ICE? By characterizing the Capitol attack as a “day of love” while labeling peaceful protesters as “insurrectionists,” the administration has effectively abandoned any pretense of principled governance. What moral or legal argument could the United States make if China seized Taiwan by force or Russia reconquered Ukraine and other former Soviet territories? In a world where only strength matters, international law and diplomatic norms become meaningless.
The deeper question is how America arrived at this troubling juncture, where government focuses on displays of dominance rather than addressing pressing national challenges. The country faces numerous crises: declining educational standards, a failing private healthcare system, contaminated drinking water, unaffordable higher education and housing, and rampant corporate exploitation by insurance companies, airlines, and pharmaceutical giants. Miller and Trump appear to recognize that by keeping Americans fixated on power struggles and threats—both external and internal—the administration diverts attention from economic hardships and other systemic problems. Even sensitive matters like the undisclosed Epstein files fade from public consciousness amid the constant barrage of force-driven headlines. In this new “ICE Age,” the politics of distraction and intimidation serve to maintain power while fundamental American values—justice, equality, and the rule of law—slowly erode beneath the surface.
