Robinson: Governing by temper tantrum a threat to the world

I realize there is some method to go along with all the madness. I understand that Trump wants to be disruptive and has disdain for traditional norms. I know he believes he has a mandate to radically change U.S. immigration policy, defend what he sees as Western values and project his vision of American strength.

But how does feuding with Australia further those ends? What rational purpose is served by lashing out at a federal judge for fulfilling his constitutional role? Why did he spend his first week in office trying to deny the fact that his inaugural crowd, while of quite respectable size, was much smaller than either of former President Obama’s?

Trump’s assault on the concept of an independent judiciary can be seen as something out of Orwell. “What is our country coming to when a judge can halt a Homeland Security travel ban and anyone, even with bad intentions, can come into U.S.?” Trump tweeted on Saturday. In one efficient sentence, the president trashed the concept of separation of powers and falsely alleged that prior administrations had let just anyone into the country.

Should that tweet be read as a deliberate attempt to encourage fear as a way of grabbing more power? Or was it simply Trump’s pre-kindergarten reflex to hit back at anyone who hits him?

The inner circle

Those in his inner circle obviously know that the way to accomplish their own goals, and to stay in Trump’s favor, is to indulge his impulses in hopes of being able to channel them in a given direction. Those who speak for the White House, including press secretary Sean Spicer, are required to emulate Trump’s air of wounded pugnacity. And yes, Melissa McCarthy’s portrayal of Spicer on “Saturday Night Live” may be the funniest thing I’ve seen all year.

Thus far, senior advisers Stephen Bannon and Stephen Miller — both from the nationalistic, protectionist, anti-immigration “alt-right” — have proved most skillful at the game of intrigue in Trump’s court. Chief of Staff Reince Priebus has had less success in getting the president to pursue a traditional Republican agenda, though he is likely to get the deregulation and tax cuts his party wants.

Make no mistake: We are talking about the rising and falling fortunes of courtiers who, with flattery and whispers and flowery professions of fealty, serve the unpredictable whims of their liege lord. The next four years promise to be a history lesson in the sort of thing that caused American democracy to be born.