President-Elect Donald Trump set to assume office as the 47th President of the United States on January 20, 2025, is preparing to usher in transformative changes that are already evident in the composition of his team. These changes, so striking, might have been considered heretical during historical periods of rigid orthodoxy, such as the Age of Inquisitions.
In those times, heresy—defined as expressing opinions that sharply contradicted established beliefs—was often met with severe punishments, well-documented and notorious enough to need no recounting. Today, Trump’s detractors, particularly the ‘Never Trumpers’ who champion adherence to conventional political norms, might view him as guilty of defying what they see as the “correct” political dogma.
This perception may partly explain why Trump, who frequently labels his opponents the “radical left,” faced extreme resistance throughout his political journey. Evidently, his adversaries sought to thwart his resurgence through three significant attempts: impeachment, imprisonment, and even assassination—all of which, ultimately failed due to Trump’s unwavering faith in himself and indefatigable spirit.
To understand the depth of resistance Trump faces, one can draw parallels with historical instances where revolutionary ideas were met with fierce opposition. In the past, when groundbreaking discoveries challenged widely held beliefs—such as the realization that the earth was not flat but spherical— those who introduced such ideas were often vilified, persecuted, or even killed for defying established norms. These innovators were seen as threats to the existing order; just as Trump’s unconventional approach has unsettled the entrenched political establishment in Washington.
The intertwining of religion and governance in historical eras often justified persecution under the guise of upholding divine order. In the modern context, Trump’s legal battles, impeachment proceedings, and public scrutiny evoke similar resistance to change— albeit in a political rather than theological sense.
Democracy, as a system of governance, emerged in Athens, Greece, during the 5th century BCE and was later refined by philosophers such as Socrates and Aristotle. Over time, it evolved through influences from thinkers like John Locke, Charles Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in France leading to its various manifestations around the world. Examples include the parliamentary system in the United Kingdom and the presidential system in the United States and India.
Despite its enduring prominence, democracy has coexisted with alternative governance systems, including monarchies, oligarchies, and diarchies, which remain prevalent in parts of the Middle East, Asia, and Japan. Some nations, like Sweden, Denmark, and Finland, have embraced “democratic socialism,” blending socialist economic policies with democratic governance—a stark contrast to the capitalist inclinations of the United States and much of the global West.
Trump’s leadership style signals a potential departure from the entrenched democratic norms that have shaped governance since the Byzantine era. His proposed reforms—and the unconventional choices for his cabinet—suggest a willingness to disrupt traditional politics in favour of a more transformative approach.
It is conceivable that by the end of his term, President Trump could draw comparisons to Constantine the Great, the Roman leader whose political and administrative reforms in the 4th century CE significantly influenced governance and shaped elements of democracy as we know it today.
Unsurprisingly, the prospect of such sweeping changes has unsettled Washington’s political class. These traditionalists, deeply rooted in the bureaucratic structures that have defined their careers, now face the disruptive reality of Trump’s second term—a term that promises to challenge the status quo and redefine the fabric of American governance.
The impending shift in U.S. leadership under President-Elect Donald Trump is generating significant anxiety, not just in Washington but globally. U.S. allies in NATO, trading partners like China, and adversaries such as Iran are all bracing for potential changes. In Africa, concern is also evident, compounded by unfounded allegations from Trump’s critics—referred to as ‘Never Trumpers’— who falsely claim that he harbors disdain for Black people in the U.S and on the African continent.
For years, a baseless narrative has circulated, alleging that Trump referred to African nations as “shithole countries.” This claim is unfounded, as Africa is a continent, not a single country, making it implausible that Trump made such a statement in the form attributed to him. These rumors appear to be part of a deliberate attempt by detractors to sow discord between Trump and Black communities worldwide.
In reality, the relationship between Africa and a second Trump administration is likely to be complex and multidimensional. However, analysts suggest that Trump’s ‘America First’ approach may introduce protectionist policies that could disrupt global trade, with potential repercussions for African economies. For instance, a reevaluation of trade initiatives such as the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) or a preference for bilateral agreements over multilateral ones could challenge Africa’s economic landscape, particularly if these moves undermine the African Continental Free Trade Area.
However, these challenges also present opportunities. If African nations act decisively, they could position themselves as viable alternatives in global supply chains, particularly in light of Trump’s campaign promise to impose a 16% tariff on imports from China. By stepping into roles vacated by China, African countries have the potential to strengthen economic ties with the U.S. under a Trump-led administration. This could be achieved through upgraded bilateral trade agreements or a reimagined ‘AGOA 2.0’ that aligns with Trump’s vision.
Security collaboration is another potential area of alignment. Strengthening the U.S. Africa Command to provide enhanced counterterrorism support could bolster peace and stability across the continent. Such efforts are critical for creating a secure environment conducive to trade and investment. Programs like Prosper Africa, launched in 2019 to promote U.S.-Africa trade and investment, could see renewed momentum if insecurity on the continent is addressed.
Ultimately, the trajectory of U.S.-Africa relations under Trump’s leadership will depend on several factors, including his administration’s policies, the responsiveness of African governments, and broader global economic trends. As such, African leaders must seize this moment to leverage emerging opportunities, particularly by adopting a strategic and business-oriented approach to engagement with the U.S.
For Africans—and Nigerians in particular—this could be a chance to benefit from Trump’s presidency if leaders align with the evolving U.S. policy framework. With the U.S., the world’s largest economy, potentially transitioning from its “global policeman” role to a leading creator of global wealth, Africa could capitalize on this shift for mutual gain.
Turning to Trump’s unique and controversial persona, parallels can be drawn between his experiences and those of historical visionaries who challenged prevailing orthodoxy. Just as the discovery that the earth was spherical contradicted the long-held belief in its flatness, Trump’s unorthodox positions— such as his initial skepticism about the catastrophic framing of COVID-19—have made him a target of political and media backlash.
These challenges are reminiscent of times in history when those who defied conventional wisdom faced severe criticism.
Throughout history, those who delivered groundbreaking insights or defied orthodoxy often faced resistance or persecution from entrenched authorities. This historical pattern mirrors the opposition that President-Elect Donald Trump is encountering from traditional politicians in Washington, as his unconventional policies aim to challenge the status quo and serve the interests of the more than 76.5 million Americans who decisively supported him.
Ancient Greek philosophers set the precedent for challenging established norms with transformative discoveries. Pythagoras (c. 570–495 BCE) observed the earth’s shadow during lunar eclipses and hypothesized a spherical earth, a theory further supported by Aristotle (384–322 BCE) through observations of disappearing ships on the horizon and shifting constellations. Eratosthenes (276–194 BCE) even calculated the earth’s circumference with remarkable precision. Despite their significant contributions, these thinkers often faced skepticism and resistance from the leaders of their time.