The idea of Donald Trump as a trickster has become a common theme in psychology, mythology, and political commentary. Whether one sees it as illuminating or misleading depends on how the archetype is understood.
From a Jungian perspective, the trickster is not simply a liar or a prankster. The trickster is an archetypal figure who disrupts established order. He exposes hypocrisy, breaks taboos, overturns conventions, and often creates chaos. The trickster can be both creative and destructive.
Carl Jung regarded archetypes as recurring patterns in the collective psyche. The trickster appears in many cultures:
Loki
Hermes
Coyote
Anansi
These figures often expose hidden truths, but they also create disorder. Their actions can force transformation, though not always in ways people welcome.
Some commentators have argued that Trump resembles the trickster because he:
breaks political conventions,
disrupts institutions,
disregards established norms of communication,
forces opponents and supporters alike to confront assumptions they may not have questioned,
and elicits unusually strong emotional reactions.
Others reject that framing because they believe it romanticizes or mythologizes the actions of a real political leader whose decisions should be evaluated concretely rather than symbolically.
From the perspective of the Translation work we’ve been doing together, I think there’s another interesting way to approach it.
Rather than asking:
“Is Trump the Trickster?”
one might ask:
“What is the trickster revealing in me?”
That shifts the inquiry from the external figure to consciousness itself.
A Prosperos-style Translation might begin with the sense testimony:
“Trump is dangerous because he is a trickster.”
Translation would then ask:
What assumptions are hidden in the word dangerous?
What assumptions are hidden in trickster?
Have I attributed ultimate authority to an external figure?
Or does Truth remain the authority regardless of who occupies political office?
The first step would remain unchanged:
Truth is all that is.
Truth is One.
My being is Truth being.
From there, the question becomes:
Can any political figure, however influential, define the Reality Self?
The answer within your framework would be no.
That doesn’t mean political leaders are unimportant. Their decisions can have profound effects on people’s lives. But those effects do not determine the ultimate nature of Being.
One more thought, connecting to our conversation about the coyote.
In many Native American traditions, Coyote is the quintessential trickster. Coyote is disruptive, deceptive, inventive, foolish, and unexpectedly wise. Coyote breaks old patterns—not necessarily because Coyote is morally good, but because disruption reveals what had been hidden.
Whether one sees Trump through that archetypal lens or not, the deeper philosophical question is less about Trump himself than about what happens to a society when the trickster archetype becomes active. Such periods often reveal hidden assumptions, loyalties, fears, and contradictions that had been present all along but were easier to ignore.
From the standpoint of your Translation method, the challenge is not merely to interpret the trickster but to remain grounded in the first step. If Truth alone has authority, then even the most disruptive public figure cannot alter the beingness and consciousness that arise from Truth. The trickster may shake appearances, but the Translation asks whether appearances have ever possessed ultimate authority in the first place.
In this illuminating book, Radin shows how we know that psychic phenomena such as telepathy, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis are real, based on scientific evidence from thousands of controlled lab tests. Radin surveys the origins of this research and explores, among many topics, the collective premonitions of 9/11. He reveals the physical reality behind our uncanny telepathic experiences and intuitive hunches, and he debunks the skeptical myths surrounding them. Entangled Minds sets the stage for a rational, scientific understanding of psychic experience.
The overwhelming majority of mediums today cannot do what they claim. Some are frauds, others are inexperienced, and many delude themselves into believing that they have such ability. These practitioners have no business sitting with the bereaved and they can do great harm. On the other hand, there are some mediums that truly can speak to the dead, do so at a very high level of accuracy, and provide an invaluable service to those who have suffered the loss of a loved one. This book provides a guide for all those who have either sat with a medium or intend to do so. You will learn what to expect, how to evaluate the information that you are told, and how mediums operate.
Ever since the human mind awoke to its own existence, it has wondered about its cosmic significance. This book chronicles an ongoing paradigm shift affecting physics and philosophy. Consciousness is rediscovered at the core of existence, expressing an intrinsic yearning for cosmic complexity, while the fabric of reality is woven from threads of information.
Proof Jul 5, 2026 Did Voyager 1 really turn around in deep space and make a discovery that scientists can’t explain? The internet is filled with dramatic claims about NASA’s most distant spacecraft—but what does the scientific evidence actually show? Launched in 1977, Voyager 1 has traveled farther from Earth than any other human-made object, venturing into interstellar space and sending back invaluable data about the mysterious region beyond our Solar System. Despite its age and immense distance, the spacecraft continues to provide scientists with unique measurements of cosmic rays, magnetic fields, plasma waves, and the interstellar medium. While viral headlines claim Voyager 1 “turned around” or discovered something impossible, there is no verified evidence that the spacecraft physically turned around or made an unexplained discovery matching those claims. Instead, NASA engineers continue to receive engineering and scientific data that help researchers better understand the boundary between our Solar System and interstellar space. In this video, we’ll explore: The latest updates from Voyager 1. What the spacecraft is actually transmitting. How Voyager communicates across billions of miles. The incredible discoveries it has made beyond the heliosphere. The truth behind sensational online headlines. Join us as we separate science fact from fiction and uncover the remarkable story of humanity’s most distant explorer.
“We are energy. We are nothing but motion, sort of frequencies that are vibrating, little wave packets that are disguised as solid matter.”
–Belleruth Naparstek
New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove Jul 10, 2026 This video is a special release from the original Thinking Allowed series that ran on public television from 1986 until 2002. It was recorded around 2000. It will remain public for only one week. Belleruth Naparstek is an American social worker, author, teacher and the producer of a guided imagery library of self-administered audio programs. She is author of Your Sixth Sense: Unlocking the Power of Your Intuition. Now you can watch all of the programs from the original Thinking Allowed Video Collection, hosted by Jeffrey Mishlove. Subscribe to the new Streaming Channel (https://thinkingallowed.vhx.tv/) and watch more than 350 programs now, with more, previously unreleased titles added weekly. Free month of the classic Thinking Allowed streaming channel for New Thinking Allowed subscribers only. Use code THINKFREELY.
32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.
36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.
Acts 5 New International Version
5 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.
7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”
“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”
10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.
New Thinking Allowed with Jeffrey Mishlove Jul 8, 2026 Mitch Horowitz is the author of many books on esoterica, spirituality, mysticism, and the occult. Among his titles are The Seeker’s Guide to the Secret Teachings of All Ages, The Miracle Club, One Simple Idea, Magician of the Beautiful: An Introduction to Neville Goddard, and Occult America. He has edited a selection of writings and lectures by Neville Goddard titled, The Ideal Realized. In this video, rebooted from 2020, he explains his passionate interest in the life and work of Neville Goddard, to the point that he has an image of Neville tattooed on his arm. He describes how Neville’s own spiritual awakening took place under the tutelage of a mysterious, black rabbi named Abdullah. The methods taught by Neville involve entering an intense feeling state while visualizing and affirming the situations to which one aspires. New Thinking Allowed host, Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, is author of The Roots of Consciousness, Psi Development Systems, and The PK Man. Between 1986 and 2002 he hosted and co-produced the original Thinking Allowed public television series. He is the recipient of the only doctoral diploma in “Parapsychology” ever awarded by an accredited university (University of California, Berkeley, 1980). He is also the Grand Prize winner of the 2021 Bigelow Institute essay competition regarding the best evidence for survival of human consciousness after permanent bodily death. He is Co-Director of Parapsychology Education at the California Institute for Human Science. (Recorded on December 21, 2020)
The Jackass Penguin waded across the wet rocks with the kind of dignity that only a creature named after an insult could muster. Its black-and-white feathers were slick with saltwater, and its stubby wings flapped uselessly as it navigated the uneven terrain.
Tourists snapped photos and laughed at its awkward gait, but the penguin didn’t seem to care. It had places to go and things to do—or not. Maybe it just knew in some deep, unspoken way that it was exactly where it was supposed to be.
I watched it while I tapped an absent-minded rhythm on the railing. I wasn’t there for the penguins. I wasn’t there for the salty breeze, or the postcards, or the overpriced fish and chips. I was there because my brother, who loved this place, had once pressed a cold soda can against my cheek on a sweltering day and said;
“Listen, Sis, if you ever need a place to go and just think, go there. The penguins won’t judge you .”
A stray soda can rolled against my shoe–empty, dented, its label faded in the salt air. I nudged it with my foot, and for a moment I could almost feel the phantom press of condensation against my skin, hear the crack of the tab, the way my brother would grin when the fizz hit his nose. For that moment, he was here again, living through me and those who loved him.
“The worst-case scenario consists of four astronauts on the moon at one time, only one month resupply window between Earth and moon, and moderate to high adverse environmental probabilities.”
NASA plans a to build a permanent base near the moon’s south pole via its Artemis program. (Image credit: NASA)
The success of NASA’s future moon base depends in large part on mission design, which should allow astronauts to work together well in a way independent from psychological training, a new study asserts.
The goal of the study was to identify “specific conditions” for mission success and to look for any “red flags” that may stand in the way, lead investigator Anamaria Berea, a computational social scientist at George Mason University (GMU), told Space.com via email. (The first author of the PLOS ONE study, which was published in May, was GMU’s Raymond Vera.)
The team conducted the research using agent-based models, which are tools for computational simulations in fields ranging from the study of bird flocks to the spread of disease, Berea said. While a lot of modern-day AI “trains” or “learns” to extrapolate from information provided in a data set, agent-based modeling instead uses a data set to “understand emergent phenomena that don’t have one single cause or direct cause,” she said.
The study team considered scenarios for how many astronauts would be on the moon base and how often resupply missions would occur. In an “initial case,” for example, the assumed mission duration was three months, with a single resupply run at Month 2 with food, water, air and a fresh group of astronauts.
Using a complex probability analysis known as a Monte Carlo simulation, the model astronauts in this scenario showed a productivity rate of about 20% against their expected tasks, “which is acceptable for a typical manufacturing process,” the authors noted.You may like
This productivity rate doesn’t take into account anything unexpected that may crop up during the mission, the authors added. “The low task completion rate suggests that, on average, teams are having challenges to overcoming psychological stressors and environmental disruptions,” they wrote.
Lessons from the International Space Station
NASA tracks productivity a little differently on the International Space Station (ISS). The agency uses a metric called “utilization,” which largely refers to the amount of crew time and number of scientific investigations that are performed on the space station during an increment or expedition. As of 2014, the ISS program suggested that ideal utilization should be 35 hours per crew per week when there are three people working on the U.S. part of the space station, and 68.5 hours if there are four or more. (The Russian side of the ISS works largely independently in this respect.)
“NASA has generally met or exceeded this goal and set a high of 120 average hours per week devoted to research from October 2019 to April 2020,” NASA’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG), which has been tracking all of these productivity figures, stated in a report published in September 2024.
“Starting March 2022 through March 2023, the latest published data, we have seen utilization near 90 hours per week,” the OIG noted. “In addition to the hours spent per week on research, the number of scientific investigations performed on-orbit has increased.”
Figure 1 of the OIG report also shows both crew time and scientific investigations increasing, as a trend, between 2000 and 2023, suggesting that utilization of the space station is continuing to grow. And this is despite periodic and documented disruptions that required astronauts to take a step back from being productive, such as emergency ammonia leaks requiring spacewalks, the 9/11 disaster, or sheltering in place during brief contingencies such as space debris passing within a few miles of the station.What to read next
Not all crew time can be used for utilization even if all goes well, however, as the station requires normal maintenance like cleaning, and astronauts also need daily time for sleep, meals and a little relaxation. Additionally, utilization tends to increase with larger crews on the space station compared with smaller ones, as maintenance becomes less of a burden with more hands to take on these tasks.
But “lack of redundancy” in key supply items to the space station does pose a risk to utilization, the OIG has noted. As just one example, SpaceX Crew Dragon capsules and Roscosmos Soyuz spacecraft are the only two vehicles that bring astronauts to the station right now. “The lack of redundancy and limited capabilities of both cargo and crew transportation increase the risk to NASA’s current and future ability to bring critical supplies, science, and crew to and from the station to maintain safe operations and full utilization of the ISS,” the OIG wrote in the report.
An artist’s concept of astronauts working on the lunar surface. (Image credit: NASA)
Isolated environments
Those of us who have been on long car rides in a group, or who remember being in tight quarters with roommates or family during the pandemic, have some idea of what an isolated, confined environment (ICE) feels like: crowded, with limited resources, and possessing few connections with the outside world. Space serves as just one example of a true ICE; isolated research bases (like in Antarctica) or submarines have also been studied in the literature, according to a separate 2021 study in the journal Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.
Put simply, ICE refers to a location where humans must work to a high standard in isolated and often dangerous circumstances, with only long-distance support (if possible) from a mission control or its equivalent. And, as the new study points out, a moon base would be a complex example of an isolated environment — one featuring not only resident astronauts but also rovers, other robots and occasional visiting crews.
“The premise for our modeling approach came from trying to understand better the human factors involved in crewed space missions, particularly the deep-space ones, for which we don’t have a lot of historical data,” Berea said.
That’s because only a handful of people have traveled beyond low Earth orbit — the two dozen who flew to lunar realms on Apollo missions in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and the four astronauts of NASA’s Artemis 2 flight around the moon this past April.
“We ran various scenarios of space mission durations, number of astronauts, potentially unforeseen circumstances that can happen on the lunar surface or the habitat,” she said. The model suggested the missions with the highest probability of success would include six astronauts working on the moon at a time, with fresh supplies coming from Earth every two weeks, and no extreme fluctuations in the environment from things like radiation or a micrometeorite impact.
“In contrast, the worst-case scenario consists of four astronauts on the moon at one time, only one month resupply window between Earth and moon, and moderate to high adverse environmental probabilities,” Berea said. And, when asked if training is a factor in mitigating adverse effects, she did not necessarily agree that the years of work NASA and other agency astronauts put in would be more effective than shorter-duration training used for moon base analogs.
“People can be very, very well trained, but for long-duration or deep-space missions, there will always be a human factor involved,” she said. “We looked at combinations of skills and personalities in a team of astronauts, and there is a fine line between having a team that is too small and a team that is too large, and there are synergies and emergent behaviors that come from people interacting with each other and with their environment.
“The team is more than the sum of its people,” she continued. “The best ways to overcome these is not by more training, but by fine-tuning other aspects of the missions: the duration of the mission, the frequency of resupply missions, and the contingency plans for accidents and unforeseen conditions in extreme environments.”
NASA, however, puts its ISS crews through many years of remote environment training long before they float through the space station hatch — and Artemis 2 commander Reid Wiseman told The New Yorker that extensive psychosocial training led to the obvious closeness seen live among his own four lunar crewmates despite tight quarters (and vent line issues that led to occasional toilet trouble).
That psychological intervention during training was by design. “Preparation starts by recruiting mentally healthy people and then providing training to help them deal with potential situations and issues,” wrote the Canadian Space Agency of this training, citing NASA protocols. “Astronauts repeat this training often enough that they can anticipate their own reactions and those of their teammates. They also receive constant support from teams on the ground and have access to a variety of tools to help them deal with potentially difficult situations.”
Berea noted, however, that psychology forms a part (but is not the focus) of her teams’ simulation, including considering NASA TLX (task load index) scores and data, which measures coping and stress for astronauts. The researchers also considered case studies from analogs including Antarctic research missions and time aboard submarines or oil rigs, as some examples.
“We need to pay attention not only to the astronauts, but the team as a whole, and each team and space mission are unique. We will not be able to model these with statistics or AI,” she said. “But what we can do is to make sure that before we send any human to live and work on the moon, that we understand well the complexity of interactions and scenarios they will face during the mission, and we can help with that.”
Consciousness, spirituality, biography, sexuality, androgyny, futurism, space, the arts, science, astrology, democracy, humor, books, movies and more
