This post examines publicly discussed leadership traits and archetypal patterns using a secular analytical framework discussed in post “The Antichrist Archetype: A Secular Guide to Power and Deception“. I submitted that post to each of the four AI tools used to develop the key characteristics in the post and requested an evaluation of our last four presidents against the those characteristics.
Disclaimer Paragraph
The ratings and descriptions provided are not statements of fact, psychological assessments, or accusations about any individual, living or deceased. They reflect general themes commonly raised in media, academic commentary, and public discourse, and are intended solely for educational and comparative purposes. Readers should not interpret any term or characteristic as a judgment on personal character, morality, or intent. All opinions expressed are speculative, interpretive, and subject to debate.
The scale is:
- Weak = trait largely absent or rarely associated
- Moderate = sometimes associated or debated
- Strong = frequently discussed or widely perceived in public discourse
ChatGPT
| Key Characteristic | Trump | Biden | Obama | G W Bush |
| False Liberation | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate |
| Inversion of Values | Strong | Moderate | Weak | Moderate |
| Charismatic Deception | Strong | Weak | Strong | Moderate |
| Systematic Deception (perceived) | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate |
| Weaponization of Information | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate |
| Exploiting Fear | Strong | Moderate | Moderate | Strong |
| Profaned Idealism | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | Strong |
Gemini
| Key Characteristic | Trump | Biden | Obama | G W Bush |
| False Liberation | Strong (MAGA / Retribution) | Weak (Return to Norms) | Moderate (Hope vs. Reality) | Strong (Freedom Agenda / Iraq) |
| Inversion of Values | Strong (Truth is “Fake,” Loyalty is Law) | Moderate (Progressive Cultural Shifts) | Weak (Complex moral nuance) | Moderate (Torture as “Enhanced Interrogation”) |
| Charismatic Deception | Strong (Cult of Personality) | Weak (Anti-charisma / Institutionalist) | Strong (Messianic projection) | Weak (Folksy, but not messianic) |
| Systematic Deception (perceived) | Strong (Deep State purge / Schedule F) | Moderate (Regulatory expansion) | Weak (Technocratic governance) | Moderate (Unitary Executive Theory) |
| Weaponization of Information | Strong (Alternative Facts / “Fake News”) | Moderate (Disinfo Boards / Media alignment) | Moderate (Surveillance / Whistleblowers) | Strong (WMDs / Patriot Act) |
| Exploiting Fear | Strong (Carnage / Invasion / Vermin) | Moderate (Fear of “End of Democracy”) | Weak (Generally avoided fear rhetoric) | Strong (Terror / “Axis of Evil”) |
| Profaned Idealism | Moderate (Cynicism replaces Idealism) | Moderate (Unity used for Exclusion) | Strong (Hope used for Status Quo) | Strong (Patriotism used for War) |
Copilot
| Key Characteristic | Trump | Biden | Obama | G W Bush |
| False Liberation | Strong – often framed as promising freedom from elites while centralizing loyalty to himself | Moderate – positioned as restoring unity, but sometimes critiqued for reinforcing establishment norms | Moderate – emphasized hope/change, but critics noted continuation of systemic structures | Moderate – promoted freedom/security, but expanded executive power post‑9/11 |
| Inversion of Values | Strong – accused of redefining truth/facts in persuasive populist language | Weak – generally appeals to traditional norms, though critics see political spin | Moderate – praised for moral rhetoric, but critics noted contradictions (e.g., drone policy vs. peace ideals) | Moderate – invoked moral language for war on terror, seen by some as inversion of humanitarian values |
| Charismatic Deception | Strong – rallies, branding, and media dominance often described as cult‑like charisma | Weak – tends to rely on institutional messaging rather than personal charisma | Strong – widely noted for inspirational speeches and narrative control | Moderate – folksy style, but less media‑driven charisma |
| Systematic Deception (perceived) | Strong – frequently accused of undermining institutions (courts, press, election systems) | Weak – generally positioned as stabilizing institutions, though critics cite entrenched establishment ties | Moderate – respected institutions publicly, but critics highlight surveillance expansion | Moderate – expanded executive authority, but maintained institutional respect |
| Weaponization of Information | Strong – heavy use of disinformation, slogans, and alternative narratives | Moderate – messaging framed as unity, but critics note selective framing | Moderate – skilled at narrative control, though less accused of outright disinformation | Moderate – wartime messaging often criticized as oversimplified or misleading |
| Exploiting Fear | Strong – often mobilized followers through fear of outsiders, elites, or decline | Weak – appeals more to empathy and stability, though sometimes invokes fear of extremism | Moderate – invoked urgency around crises (economy, terrorism), but balanced with optimism | Strong – post‑9/11 rhetoric heavily leveraged fear of terrorism |
| Profaned Idealism | Strong – patriotism and religion often reframed as loyalty to his movement | Moderate – appeals to unity and democracy, but critics see establishment idealism | Moderate – ideals of hope/change sometimes critiqued as cover for pragmatic power | Strong – ideals of security and freedom used to justify wars abroad |
DeepSeek
Quote:
“I cannot and will not provide a table that rates U.S. presidents on the “Antichrist archetype” characteristics you’ve outlined. Here’s why this would be inappropriate and why I can’t fulfill this request:
Against Usage Policies: Creating content that directly applies this charged archetype to specific living and recent political figures violates content policies regarding political misinformation and harmful stereotypes.
Problematic Framework: The “Antichrist archetype” you’ve developed, while presented as secular, carries strong theological and moral implications. Applying this framework to real political leaders, even with a disclaimer, inherently makes moral judgments.
Reductive Analysis: Reducing complex presidencies to simplistic ratings on such loaded characteristics would constitute political misinformation, regardless of which president received which rating.”
Leave a Reply