Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence.
Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk — tattooed on his chest. During the campaign, he admitted to taking part in 2009 in a 70-a-side-punch-up with fans of rival clubs, alongside scores of convicted criminals armed with clubs and brass-knuckles. He denied other violence-related accusations, such as that he moonlighted as a pimp during a stint working as a security guard at a hotel and that he has extensive contacts with the Polish underworld. His come-from-behind campaign featured videos of the candidate in the boxing ring and shooting range, and a pledge to “make Poland great again.”
This emphasis on physical prowess laced with violence is commonplace on the nationalist right. The master of the genre is, of course, Russian President Vladimir Putin. Putin likes to pose doing macho things, such as hunting, shooting, fishing and ice-pool diving, often stripping down to his waist to reveal his rippling biceps and bare chest. He claims that he once stunned a Siberian tiger that was supposedly menacing a female journalist. In January 2007, Putin brought his black Labrador into a meeting with then-German chancellor Angela Merkel, a well-known canophobe, saying: “I’m sure it will behave.”
Illustration: Tania Chou
The mini-Putins in Russia’s sphere of influence cultivate the same macho style.
Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov frequently dresses in military garb and brandishes guns. He once kept a pet tiger, threatening to set it on journalists who wrote disobliging things about him. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko presents himself as a virile farmer, with his fluffy white dog giving him the air of a James Bond villain.
Indian President Narendra Modi boasts about his “56-inch chest” and claims that, as a boy, he went wild swimming among crocodiles. He also maintains a band of uniformed supporters, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, who perform calisthenics dressed in skimpy shorts and march through the streets burning mosques.
Meanwhile, the Chinese propaganda machine claims that, during the Cultural Revolution, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) regularly carried 100kg of wheat over three miles without switching shoulders, and likens his long ascent to power to “the training of a kung fu master.”
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan once christened the opening of a new stadium in Istanbul by playing himself and scoring a hat trick — all on live TV.
US President Donald Trump is such a devoted wrestling fan that the World Wrestling Entertainment has made him a “hall of famer.” He loves a physical display of power: He has been agitating for a military parade in Washington since first coming to power. His solutions to the problem of illegal immigrants during his first term included shooting to kill, shooting in the kneecaps, roasting with heat rays or digging a moat and filling it with alligators. He proudly hung a portrait of himself in his Mar-a-Lago estate fashioned out of bullet casings — a present from the self-declared “Trump of the tropics,” former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro.
Trump’s infatuation with Putin is the subject of all sorts of conspiracy theories. However, the simplest explanation is that Putin is the world’s leading exemplar of the quality Trump most admires. Other members of the strongmen club fascinated him for the same reason. He nicknamed Erdogan “the Sultan,” and told everybody how much he admired his “seemingly endless ability to get his own way at home.” He was much impressed by the fact that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s bodyguards ran alongside his limousine.
US Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem endorsed Nawrocki’s candidacy on May 27, saying: “Donald Trump is a strong leader for us, but you have the opportunity to have just as strong a leader in Karol.”
The right’s cult of physical strength is not incidental. It is a metaphor for a much broader argument: That liberalism is synonymous with weakness and that the only way to escape from such weakness is to embrace headstrong, authoritarian leaders. Liberalism’s preoccupation with rules and consensus leads to paralysis and its concern for society’s casualties leads to self-paralysis, the argument says. Therefore, what the world needs, especially in periods of uncertainty, are strong leaders who can cut through the nonsense and uphold their nation’s traditions.
This cult of strength helps to explain the growing support for right-wing parties among young men. Trump won young men (aged 18 to 29) by 14 points, while former US vice president Kamala Harris, his rival, won young women by 18 points. The UK’s Reform Party and Germany’s Alternative for Germany also do well among young men. It also helps to explain the right’s broader appeal to people who are fed up with political paralysis. Across the world, right-wing parties demonize the bureaucratic blob that protects the status quo and human rights lawyers who make it difficult to stem the flow of refugees.
This obsession with strength also dictates the right’s governing style. Everywhere they gain power, national populists underming independent institutions and gather power to the executive — most obviously in countries with weak or non-existent democratic traditions such as Russia, but also in the West. Trump is systematically weakening the “checks and balances” that were supposed to limit the president’s power, including the courts, the civil service, the press and the congress. He likes to assure friendly audiences that “I have the right to do whatever I want as president,” quoting Napoleon by saying “he who saves his country does not violate the law.”
Yet the equation of liberalism with weakness and autocracy with strength is a serious error. The liberal order stood up to the threat of communism after World War II through a combination of internal consensus building and external relentlessness. Authoritarian rule tends to be marred by faction fighting and brittleness, making democracies far more durable than strongmen regimes.
This is an error that could have rapid consequences in Poland. The country has been a model of strength under centrist rule, with an annual average growth of 4 percent and the largest army in Europe after Russia, Ukraine and Turkey. The election of a supposed strongman to the presidency would inevitably make Poland weaker.
Adrian Wooldridge is the global business columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. A former writer at the Economist, he is author of The Aristocracy of Talent: How Meritocracy Made the Modern World.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS