The emergence of new populist leaders back in the agenda issues about rationality in politics. Leaders such as Chávez and appeal to grandiloquent rhetoric and/or traditions that was buried since the postwar: Maga, Bolivarianism, fourth transformation. And make ranseling proposals. Even when defeated or are unquestionable, they signal out indignation with Statu Quo and authenticity. And so they generate political gains. But there is more at stake, especially on the international level.
In strategic and hostile interaction between world leaders, volatile and unpredictable opinion ensures advantages because they intimidate opponents, leading them to make concessions. Here the issue of rationality is fundamental: rational agents expect other agents being rational not to carry out threats, which guarantees balance, as he argued. This is the basis of the theory of deterrent (deterrence).
The argument regarding the strategic value of madness is known as the Madman Theory theory, because it was expressed in this way by Nixon to his chief of staff: “I call this from the theory of the madman, Bob. I want you to believe me I came to the point where I would do anything to end the war. We leak the message: ‘We can’t hold it when it is furious and it has a finger on the nuclear button.’
This madness is not genuine, it is manufactured, as Machiavelli suggested, in Livy discourses (“It is often wise to simulate madness”). Crazy – stategular or not -, however, represent a small percentage –8% between 1986 and 2010 – from world leaders, according to one, but has recently been having a political success in the new populist wave.
But the theory has limitations. The main thing is that there are trade-offs involved in strategy: supposed irrationality gains also imply credibility losses. Irrational actors cannot offer guarantees about the promises and proposals they make, as Roseanne McManus argues in “The Limits of Madman Theory: How Trump’s Unpredictability Could Hurt Hurt Foreign Policy”, published at Foreign Affairs, 2025. chartered due to their own instability and volatility that weakens such leaders. And of course, irrationality is always under suspicion.
More specifically McManus warns that unpredictable actions can lead to misunderstandings, causing opponents to take preventive measures that intensify conflicts rather than resolve them. Strategic partners also matter: they will be cautious about an unpredictable leader, resulting in weakening alliances and reducing cooperation on global issues. Trump, for example, does not operate in an institutional void.
Democratic institutions and public opinion establish restrictions on how irrational it may seem in a context of uncertainty. The shot can also come out of the culattra to those who say “if they pray a lot, I’m already in heaven”, (Ballad of the Crazy,).
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
