What makes a tyrant?

One definition of "tyrant" in the Merriam-Webster dictionary is "One resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power."

Anyone who has had the misfortune to watch any of the execrable "Apprentice" television programs knows that Donald Trump uses his authority as a weapon. With his scowling game face and his use of scathing language he discards people like so much rubbish.

Tyrants like Trump flourish in the corporate world, where they can surround themselves with toadies and hold court in their own little autocracy, never hearing any opinion contrary to their own. Typically, such bullies have thin skins, no tolerance of disagreement, and nasty, often uncontrollable tempers.

The Great Pretender exhibits many of these behaviors. By definition the president cannot be an autocrat, but Trump does his best. To name a few instances, in no particular order:

--He issues arbitrary and sometimes self-contradictory orders, apparently on whims. Recently tours of the White House were resumed, but only for Americans. Visitors from other countries have to apply through their embassy. Didn't work for Great Britain, though. The State Department informed that embassy that rules regarding tours were "on hold."

--He fails to grasp the need for security. During a Feb. 11 dinner with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in a public restaurant Trump made phone calls and discussed classified information regarding a North Korean missile test as if it were dinner conversation.

--He does not respect the constitutional guarantee of a free press. Trump and his top aides regularly deny access to journalists they perceive as "enemies."

--He has no control over his anger. In "The dangerous rage of Donald Trump," The Washington Post reported on March 6 that "when Trump gets angry, he looks for a way to strike back. And he is willing to stretch — or break with — the truth to give himself a measure of satisfaction in that regard. . . .The trouble for Trump — and all of the rest of us — is that Trump is now president. And there are real-world consequences to both how angry he gets and how he chooses to blow off that steam. An angry call with the Australian prime minister, for example, has real-world implications. So does an open and aggressive attempt to disqualify the free and independent press. Or the accusation that your predecessor used the powers of the federal government to specifically target you.

Feel free to comment regarding your ideas of Trumpian tyranny.

--Richard Brown