In recent days, America and the world have witnessed the emergence of a new form of power—not the traditional monarchy with its pomp and circumstance, but something far more insidious: the rise of the CEO-Monarchy. This new kind of presidency wields authority with diminished accountability, greater absolutism, and, ultimately, beyond the reach of courts, Congress, or even the will of the people. The government's system of checks and balances, once the foundation of American democracy, now teeters on the edge of becoming a regime where executive power reigns supreme, unchecked by any branch of government, the church, or the public. This profound mutation should give us pause, leading to deep reflection on the nature of power, the role of the state, and our responsibilities as citizens and as the people of God.

Throughout history, human beings have demonstrated a deep-seated fascination with powerful leaders. This fascination extends beyond just crowned monarchs to encompass strongmen, emperors, and modern-day autocrats who promise order and security in exchange for our allegiance. From the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the Caesars of Rome, and even to the autocratic rulers of our own time, our hearts seem drawn to hierarchical structures. We long for someone who can rise above the chaos and assure us with confidence, "I've got this." This urge to place our trust in a strongman figure, rather than in the collaborative stewardship that God intended, reveals a deep brokenness within the human condition. This brokenness has echoed through the generations, shaping the course of history and the nature of power.

This mutation should profoundly matter to Christians. As the people of God, we cannot afford to ignore the alarming rise of unchecked executive power. This unprecedented shift in the balance of authority demands our vigilant attention and principled response.

The Genesis Mutation: From Stewardship to Domination

Our story begins not in palaces or battlefields, but in a garden—a place of abundance and collaboration. God entrusted Adam and Eve with gentle authority (radah), calling them to cultivate creation alongside Him. Yet, the serpent's whisper, "You will be like God," sparked a profound mutation. Suddenly, leadership transformed into domination (mashal), with hierarchy becoming a curse rather than a blessing.

After the Fall, human relationships with God, others, and creation fractured and distorted. Kinship gave way to various forms of power-seeking and domination. This pattern has continued through generations as humans have repeatedly traded their freedom for the alluring yet deceptive promise of security.

And so, humanity's long drift toward centralised power began. At Babel, they sought greatness apart from God. Despite divine warnings of exploitation, Israel demanded earthly kings. Saul descended into paranoia, and David succumbed to temptation. Solomon built empires resembling Egypt more than Eden. Even Israel's best kings could not escape the gravitational pull of mutated power.

The Longing for a King: Israel’s Complicated Relationship with Monarchy

When God finally relented to Israel's request for a king, the expectation was for a ruler distinct from the kings of the world. Deuteronomy 17:14–20 prescribes this king as one who must adhere to the Torah, resisting the accumulation of wealth, weapons, and wives. However, Israel, impatient and insecure, chose kings on their own terms. This choice signified a mutation in their relationship with God—a shift from trusting divine provision to relying on human authority.

Saul, the first amongst them, started with a humble demeanour, only to plummet into the depths of paranoia and voracious power-grasping. David, the shepherd-king, aligned far more closely with the divine ideal, yet even he fell prey to the traps of lust and violence. As for Solomon, though undoubtedly wise, he constructed an empire mirroring Egypt more than the Garden of Eden - hoarding wealth, expanding military might, and subjugating his people through forced labour. By the time the Hasmonean dynasty emerged, the fusion of spiritual and political authority had reached its breaking point. What started as a revolt against oppression morphed into yet another power-hungry monarchy, paving the way for Rome's eventual takeover. The lesson, it would seem, is clear: even the finest of human kings cannot escape the gravitational pull of power. This gravitational force that continues to shape the course of human history, like a Shakespearean tragedy with no end in sight.

In this context, the rise of America's CEO-Monarchy represents another mutation—a deviation from the principles of shared power and accountability that once defined the U.S. system. This mutation challenges Christians to reflect on their engagement with politics and power, discerning between the kings they want and the King they truly need.

A Constitutional Mutation in Slow Motion

The United States was birthed from a fervent rejection of the very notion of monarchy - a bold, decisive break from the shackles of unchecked power. The Founding Fathers rebelled against the tyrannical clutches of a single ruler, and with great care and foresight, they crafted a Constitution to prevent such abuses from ever resurfacing. The 2025 presidency has undergone a pernicious mutation through a series of clever legal rulings, budgetary manoeuvres, and ideological shifts. What the Founders would have found profoundly disturbing is now a form of governance that far surpasses the power of the very monarchical systems they so valiantly sought to escape. One can't help but wonder if the Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves, shaking their heads and muttering, "We traded 'God Save the King' for 'Hail to the CEO' - and now we're wishing we could go back to the good old days of 'Off with their heads!'"

The 2024 Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States was, quite frankly, a real head-scratcher. In a 5-4 decision, the learned justices decided to grant sitting presidents near-total immunity from prosecution for their official actions. Cheeky, isn't it? This effectively places the presidency above the law, which seems rather at odds with the whole reason for American Revolution. This ruling represents a rather concerning mutation in the balance of power, one that fundamentally alters the checks and balances designed to prevent that whole tyranny business. Jolly good show, your honours. Jolly good show indeed.

In early 2025, the Trump administration brazenly froze $2 billion in USAID funds earmarked for global humanitarian aid. As they say on Fox News, "This is a tremendous accomplishment, folks!" When a federal court dutifully ordered the release of these funds, the White House, in a fit of audacity, appealed to the Supreme Court. Their argument? Such spending decisions were a "core executive function." Imagine that! While the Court ultimately ruled against the administration in a narrow 5-4 decision, the case laid bare a deeper, more unsettling truth: executive power is mutating, expanding at an alarming rate. And the legal rationale underpinning this growth has become increasingly entrenched. This is no mere change, my friends; it is a veritable mutation in the constitutional fabric, one that challenges the very foundations of American democracy.

The administration's legal advisors claim that budget execution is the president's prerogative, citing the 2024 court ruling as a precedent. However, the opposing counsel argues that this would undermine Congress's power of the purse, reducing their appropriations to mere suggestions that the executive can disregard. Legal scholars warn another favourable ruling could enshrine a doctrine of "imperial infallibility," systematically eviscerating the checks and balances the Founding Fathers so painstakingly devised. As the justices ponder this latest argy-bargy, they must grapple not just with legal niceties, but the existential question posed by that wily old James Madison in Federalist 51: how on earth can a republic constrain power when the sly devils in charge wrap themselves in legal armour?

Mutations need just the right environment

Mutations do not occur randomly; rather, they are responses to environmental pressures. Akin to how drought or pollution can reshape an ecosystem, the political environment creates conditions that encourage the emergence and spread of new ideas—some healthy, others harmful.

Today, America faces an intensely divided environment. The gulf between left and right appears wider than ever, with each side viewing the other not as neighbours but as threats. Simultaneously, economic inequality deepens, giving rise to two worlds: one for the wealthy elite, and another for the struggling masses. These pressures form fertile soil for new ideological mutations to take root.

For a long time, many Americans have harboured resentment toward a political class and educated elite perceived as paternalistic and out-of-touch. They feel lectured rather than listened to by experts who seem disconnected from their everyday struggles. Cost of living pressures, the crisis on the southern border which they see as an invasion, the long-tail effects of COVID-19, the rise of conspiracies, and the tragedy of millions affected by the opioid epidemic—these issues have fuelled this resentment. Consequently, this has created space for populist ideas that reject expertise altogether, fostering distrust toward institutions labelled the "deep state".

Frustration with "wokeness" and political correctness has provoked a backlash against perceived censorship. Some now view it as the policing of speech and thought, eliciting defensive reactions that amplify division rather than promote dialogue. Jordan Peterson's "lobster hierarchy" thesis, which argues that inequality is natural and biologically wired, arrived just in time to reassure those unsettled by shifting cultural norms around gender roles and identity. In a world where traditional masculinity is increasingly criticised as toxic, Peterson's message resonates with those who feel attacked or shamed simply for being male.

Some find Curtis Yarvin's notion of a CEO-monarch, where government operates akin to a business—efficient yet undemocratic—the ideal solution to America's perceived democratic shortcomings. In an environment where many feel democratic processes have become sluggish and ineffective, Yarvin's vision of CEO-led governance took root. Frustrated by political gridlock and perceived bureaucratic inefficiency, people become willing to exchange democratic accountability for the promise of efficiency and decisive leadership under a CEO-monarch. This mutation in political thought reflects a growing belief that a business-like governance model, untethered from traditional democratic norms, could deliver the solutions an ailing system has failed to provide.

In the present climate, one observes the rapid proliferation of noxious ideas, steadily undermining the very foundation of society - that which was once built upon trust and mutual understanding. Witness the curious new phenomenon described by that wily chap, Steve Bannon, as the "Kevin from Accounts" syndrome. By day, the fellow appears as docile as a newborn babe, yet come the cloak of night, he undergoes a most remarkable transformation, mutating into a veritable keyboard warrior! Quite the Batman on social media, is he not?Hiding behind the digital curtain, these Kevins feel most emboldened to unleash their most extreme views, thereby widening the chasm of polarisation and sadly degrading civil discourse.

Mutations need just the right nutrients

Butterflies do not simply appear; they emerge when the environment provides exactly the right nutrients and conditions for transformation. In America's political ecosystem, the CEO-Monarch butterfly could only break free from its cocoon because powerful individuals carefully nourished its growth, furnishing it with the precise resources needed to strengthen its wings and soar.

Through his immense wealth, strategic investments, and insatiable thirst for knowledge, Peter Thiel supplied the necessary sustenance that allowed fringe ideas to take root and flourish. By funding thinkers like Curtis Yarvin and leaders like JD Vance, Thiel effectively brought once-marginal political theories into mainstream discourse, reshaping the ideological landscape of American conservatism. His financial backing enabled Yarvin's neo-reactionary critiques of democracy and bureaucratic governance to gain legitimacy and influence among powerful circles in Silicon Valley and Washington. His strategic patronage of JD Vance, first through venture capital mentorship and then unprecedented campaign contributions, propelled Vance from relative obscurity into the heart of American political power, ultimately landing him on the Trump presidential ticket.

Elon Musk, the technological titan, fuelled this political metamorphosis with his vast financial resources and a personal crusade against the "woke mind virus". By asserting control over critical communication mediums, such as Starlink satellites, Neuralink interfaces, and X's digital town square, Musk empowered the emerging CEO-Monarch butterfly to soar rapidly and widely. His leadership persona – autocratic yet charismatic, technocratic yet stubbornly independent – demonstrated how technological supremacy could circumvent traditional democratic safeguards.

Leonard Leo, a less well-known figure, provided the judicial canopy under which executive power could grow unchecked. Over decades, Leo strategically reshaped America's courts into instruments of presidential authority. His extensive network funded hundreds of conservative judges who systematically weakened democratic safeguards and reinforced presidential immunity doctrines, such as the Supreme Court's Trump v. U.S. ruling. This judicial protection allowed the CEO-Monarch butterfly to spread its wings without fear of meaningful resistance from Congress or the courts. Doubtless, there are many more powerful actors and complex forces at play, beyond this partial account.

The First Glimpse of America’s CEO Monarch

The arrival of America's first self-styled CEO-Monarch, Mr Trump, is a rather bewildering sight – one that inspires both dread and delight, depending on where one's political allegiances lie. One thing we can say, it is not boring. It is a most perplexing state of affairs that has come to pass in the land of the free. Whether we are witnessing the birth of a bold new era or the descent into a modern-day fiefdom remains to be seen. Only time will tell.

The dismantling of institutional safeguards begins the conquest on American soil. The Schedule F executive order declares war against expertise, reducing tens of thousands of career civil servants to disposable foot soldiers in a loyalty-driven regime. Once tasked with stewarding public welfare, agencies like USAID and the EPA are now hollowed out and repurposed as extensions of presidential will. Scientists, diplomats, and regulators face a stark ultimatum: pledge allegiance or face exile. This purge mirrors the oldest playbook of tyranny—power is consolidated by erasing dissent, replacing merit with obedience, and transforming public service into personal fealty. A mutation in governance has occurred, where loyalty supplants expertise and public service becomes a form of personal devotion.

Financial coercion follows, weaponising scarcity to enforce compliance. The administration has frozen $2 billion in congressionally approved humanitarian aid for 2025, halting malaria prevention and HIV treatments for millions. This is not fiscal policy, but rather economic siegecraft. By starving agencies of resources, the administration reduces governance to a mercenary transaction: serve the throne or face extinction. Vital programs now serve as bargaining chips, their survival contingent on political alignment. This represents a modern twist on feudal submission, where life-saving aid replaces grain stores as the currency of control.

Legal subversion completes the trifecta, enshrining impunity as constitutional doctrine. The Supreme Court's Trump v. United States ruling, granting presidents immunity for "core executive functions," has transformed the judiciary from a watchdog into a lapdog. Legal teams now act as royal scribes, drafting edicts that cloak authoritarian overreach in a thick fog of legalese. When courts order the release of frozen funds, the administration simply ignores the ruling - a cheeky move reminiscent of monarchs "dispensing" with inconvenient laws. The message is unequivocal: the law bends over backwards for those in power, not the other way around.

The CEO-Monarchy's ambitions reach far beyond America's borders. Forging unimaginable global alliances, it tests strategies on vulnerable nations. Bidding farewell to its "weak" European allies, the CEO-Monarchy now cozies up to the world's strongmen (I am obviously referring to Putin), while berating Ukraine's President for not being thankful enough. Dangling economic carrots, it ignores historically irreconcilable ideological divides to construct a new world order of opportunism and respecting those who holds the cards. Today, tarrifs are imposed Mexico and Canada; tomorrow, Europe or Australia could fall victim to its machinations. Even the nice Canadian Prime Minister lives on edge, fretting that the CEO-Monarchy seeks to undermine Canada's economy, leaving it weak and defenseless - an easy target for takeover. A hostile corporate acquisition, but of an entire nation, no less! And then there's Gaza, which could become the Middle East's new Riviera, and Greenland, which will prosper and have peace, but it will require bowing before the veiled threats of occupation.

Silicon Valley's tech titans, drunk on their god-like power, view democracy as a glitch - a flawed algorithm to be optimised into oblivion. These billionaire barons, Thiel and Musk, bankroll the sinister infrastructure of control, from shadowy legal networks to dystopian satellite constellations. Meanwhile, the public, worn ragged by crisis after crisis, executive order after order, find themselves tempted to trade hard-won human rights for the false comfort of order. It's an age-old Faustian bargain - the timeless farce of the gullible, trading their soul for the Crown's promise of a cosy, though utterly vapid, existence. Paraphrasing Jesus, once said, what good is it for a person to Make America Great Again, if they lose their soul in the process?

The relentless pursuit of power, power, and more power is the inevitable endgame. Once unleashed, this absolute power recognises no limits and takes no prisoners. The American flag will be unfurled from Earth to Mars and beyond. The CEO-Monarch will continue to devour environments, agencies, courts, nations, and people, until every check is neutralised, every dissent silenced, and every institution remade in its own divine image. To resist this, we need more than just nostalgia for democracy; we must rediscover the collective will to protect every human life as sacred, created in the image and likeness of God. Without political and theological vigilance, what remains is not freedom but a feudal fiefdom - a world where constitutions gather dust, and citizens bow to the whims of a global CEO who reigns as a sovereign monarch, where we bow the knee to the caprices of a corporate overlord who demands our total submission.

Jesus and the Upside-Down Kingdom: A Dethronement of Power

For Christians, Jesus embodies the very essence of true kingship. It is a kinship, not a mutation, but a radical critique of corrupted power and authority. He rides into Jerusalem, not astride a warhorse, but upon a humble donkey, symbolising a profound departure from the traditional trappings of power. His throne is not gilded in gold, but stained with the blood of His sacrifice. His coronation takes place on a cross, with a mocking sign above His head proclaiming Him "King of the Jews". This is a kingship that subverts every expectation, prioritising servanthood over supremacy, and dismantling the very structures humanity has built to protect our own power.

In this sense, Jesus redefines the very essence of power, rejecting the dominance and one-upmanship that have shaped human history. As Paul so eloquently puts it in Philippians 2:6–8, "Though He was in the form of God, He did not consider equality with God something to be used to His own advantage. Instead, He emptied Himself." In other words, Jesus does not grasp for power; He willingly lays it down. And in doing so, He unveils the world's rulers for what they truly are—pretenders to a throne that only He can rightfully occupy. This act of self-emptying is a radical transformation in the concept of kingship itself, where power is not about control, but about sacrifice.

Jesus' kingdom flips the world on its head. It's a topsy-turvy place where the last become first, the meek reign supreme, and love calls the shots. Talk about a revolution in authority! We've shifted from grasping for power to sharing it. In this kingdom, leaders don't rule the roost - they serve the flock. Wealth isn't for hoarding, it's for passing around. And dominance? Forget about it.

I remember once after a sermon on this kind of Kingdom, a member of the congregation queried where I was getting my "leftist views." I quipped, "Straight from the gospels." While my retort may have been a tad too flippant, the upside-down kingdom that Jesus proclaimed is indeed the very essence of the Gospel message, not some "leftist lunacy".