Ep 130 - Respect, Fear, and a Train Wreck at the UN

Donald Trump would like Americans to believe that the world respects us again. Not just respects us, mind you. According to Trump, America is respected like never before. We are feared. We are admired. We are no longer laughed at. We are no longer taken advantage of. The great restoration of American prestige is complete.

Then Donald Trump went to the United Nations.

Donald Trump says America is respected again. His speech at the United Nations made a very different case.

And for thirty-seven minutes, the President of the United States delivered one of the clearest demonstrations imaginable of the difference between power and respect.

This was not a speech that merely wandered. It was not simply awkward. It was not just another Trump performance full of self-congratulation and verbal detours. It was a collision between campaign-rally grievance, domestic culture-war rhetoric, diplomatic antagonism, threats, boasting, and the stubborn insistence that all of this somehow represents restored American greatness.

Trump called American political opponents “Dumocrats” from the podium of the United Nations. He launched into rhetoric about “transgender mutilization” and “transgender insanity.” He announced that artificial intelligence would now be called “Super Intelligence,” as though one of the most consequential technological developments in human history had simply been waiting for Donald Trump to handle the branding.

This was not Mar-a-Lago. It was not a campaign rally. It was not Truth Social at two in the morning. It was the United Nations General Assembly. Foreign governments were listening. Allies were listening. Adversaries were listening. And the man speaking was not merely Donald Trump. He was speaking as the President of the United States.

Then came Mexico.

Trump described Mexico as the epicenter of cartel violence and spoke of territory controlled by enemy cartels. There is nothing dishonest about acknowledging that Mexico faces a grave cartel problem. It does. The issue is the manner in which the President of the United States publicly described a neighboring country with which we share an enormous economic, political, and security relationship.

Mexico is not some distant abstraction. It is one of America’s largest trading partners. It is a country whose cooperation matters on immigration, drug trafficking, border enforcement, agriculture, manufacturing, organized crime, and regional security. Diplomacy sometimes requires blunt conversations between allies and partners. But publicly dressing down a neighbor from the world’s biggest diplomatic stage is something else entirely.

And then the speech got darker.

Trump turned to Iran and asked whether he should “annihilate the Islamic Republic.” He spoke of driving it into hell with no chance of survival and no hope for future greatness or generations.

Those words matter.

Trump did not explicitly say he intended to annihilate the Iranian people, and accuracy matters even when the rhetoric itself is outrageous. But when the President of the United States, commander in chief of the most powerful military in the world, starts using the language of annihilation toward another sovereign state, the obvious question becomes what that word is supposed to mean in practice.

Regime? Military? Infrastructure? Cities? Civilians? Future generations?

The speech itself was not a war crime. Words alone do not make it one. But annihilation rhetoric from a president is not normal diplomatic language, and it should not be treated as though it is. The laws of war exist precisely because civilians do not lose their protections simply because their government becomes an enemy.

That was the point where the spectacle stopped being merely embarrassing and became genuinely disturbing.

And while Trump was busy explaining how respected America is now, representatives from countries he was attacking were getting up and walking out. Iran’s delegation left during his remarks. Cuba’s delegation also walked out after Trump attacked its government and predicted its collapse.

No, that does not mean “the world walked out on Trump.” Iran and Cuba are not friendly governments, and walkouts at the United Nations are political theater. But symbolism matters in diplomacy. Trump certainly understands that when the symbolism favors him. He understands handshakes. Flags. State dinners. Applause. Military displays. Foreign leaders praising him.

So he does not get to suddenly declare symbolism meaningless when the picture is foreign diplomats leaving the room while he talks about how much the world respects us.

Then there was the United Nations itself.

Criticizing the UN is not inherently wrong. The institution is deeply flawed. It is bureaucratic, slow, politically constrained, and sometimes spectacularly ineffective. American skepticism toward international institutions did not begin with Donald Trump.

But Trump’s message went beyond criticism of inefficiency. His speech repeatedly returned to a broader philosophy: American sovereignty means nobody gets to constrain American power. International institutions are useful when they serve American priorities and suspect when they do not. The International Criminal Court was not merely criticized. Trump called it evil and urged member countries to leave it.

This is where the language of “respect” begins to matter.

Trump has spent years treating international relations like a status contest. Either they are laughing at us or fearing us. Either they are taking advantage of us or obeying us. Either America is dominant or America is weak.

That is not the same thing as respect.

Fear is not respect.

Dependence is not respect.

A country needing American weapons does not mean that country admires the American president. A government needing access to American markets does not mean it trusts American leadership. A foreign leader smiling for the cameras may simply be doing what diplomats have done for centuries: dealing politely with the person who controls something they need.

And when we stop listening to Donald Trump tell us how respected America is and actually look at international opinion, the picture becomes considerably less flattering.

Pew Research Center surveyed more than 42,000 adults across 36 countries in 2026. The median favorable rating for the United States was 37 percent. The median unfavorable rating was 57 percent. Median confidence in Donald Trump to do the right thing in world affairs was just 23 percent.

Among allies, the decline in trust is even more striking. In Canada, the share of people describing the United States as a reliable partner fell dramatically compared with previous years. Similar declines have appeared across multiple European countries.

The point is not that every person on Earth dislikes the United States. They do not. The point is not that America was universally beloved before Trump. It was not. The United States has damaged its reputation before through wars, torture, surveillance, civilian casualties, trade conflicts, and foreign-policy decisions made under presidents of both parties.

The point is that Trump claims he uniquely restored American respect, and the available evidence simply does not support that sweeping claim.

There is another problem, and it may be the most important one.

International views of Donald Trump and international views of the United States are becoming increasingly intertwined. Pew has found that people abroad are now more likely to connect their opinion of Trump with their opinion of America itself than they were during Joe Biden’s presidency or even during Trump’s first term.

That matters because Donald Trump will eventually leave office. The United States will still be here.

Presidents represent countries. Their policies matter. Their rhetoric matters. Their behavior matters. And when a president spends years telling the world that strength means domination, alliances are transactional, institutions are obstacles, and respect means everybody else knowing their place, eventually some of that reputation sticks to the country he represents.

That is why this speech matters beyond the jokes.

Yes, “Super Intelligence” was ridiculous. Yes, “Dumocrats” at the United Nations was juvenile. Yes, the culture-war rhetoric sounded absurd in that setting.

But the deeper problem is that this was not some isolated bad night. It was Trump’s governing style compressed into one speech and broadcast to the world.

Grievance. Bragging. Insults. Threats. Branding. Domination.

And through all of it, one constant message: everybody respects us now.

America is still enormously powerful. It is still economically indispensable. It is still militarily dominant. It remains central to global trade, diplomacy, technology, and security. No serious government can simply ignore the United States.

But being impossible to ignore is not the same thing as being respected.

Being feared is not the same thing as being admired.

Being needed is not the same thing as being trusted.

Donald Trump keeps insisting that America is respected again.

After watching that speech, maybe the more important question is this:

What exactly does Donald Trump think respect means?

SOURCES

White House summary of Trump’s September 22, 2026 United Nations address - https://www.whitehouse.gov/releases/2026/09/president-trump-at-the-united-nations-while-others-have-talked-i-have-acted/

Full transcript of Trump’s September 22, 2026 UN General Assembly speech - https://rollcall.com/factbase/trump/transcript/donald-trump-speech-81st-united-nations-general-assembly-september-22-2026/

Reuters — Trump warns at UN that he could “annihilate” Iran without a peace deal; coverage of Mexico, Cuba, the ICC and broader speech - https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/trump-set-whirlwind-un-meetings-with-wars-iran-ukraine-agenda-2026-09-22/

Reuters — Trump announces that the U.S. government will refer to artificial intelligence as “super intelligence” - https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-says-us-will-henceforth-call-ai-super-intelligence-2026-09-22/

Associated Press — Live coverage of Trump’s UN address, including the Iranian delegation walkout and “super intelligence” remarks - https://apnews.com/article/692e1e171a791be0c9b9c1f56718a0d0

Pew Research Center — International views of the United States and its global role, 2026 - https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/06/23/comparing-how-americans-and-others-around-the-world-view-the-united-states-global-role/

Pew Research Center — International confidence in Trump compared with other global leaders - https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/06/23/how-do-views-of-trump-compare-with-other-global-leaders/

Pew Research Center — Trump gets negative reviews internationally as fewer see the U.S. as a reliable partner - https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/06/23/trump-gets-negative-reviews-internationally-as-fewer-say-u-s-is-a-reliable-partner/

Pew Research Center — European views of Trump and the United States are especially negative - https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/06/23/european-views-of-trump-and-the-u-s-are-especially-negative/

Pew Research Center — International views of the U.S. and its president are increasingly correlated during Trump’s second term - https://www.pewresearch.org/decoded/2026/08/28/international-views-of-the-us-and-its-president-are-increasingly-correlated/

Pew Research Center — Chart showing the increasing correlation between views of the United States and confidence in Trump - https://www.pewresearch.org/chart/in-trumps-second-term-international-views-of-u-s-are-increasingly-linked-with-views-of-its-president/