The Optics of Power: Authoritarian Aesthetics in the Age of Trump
Two images. One leader. A thousand signals. As the United States plunges into yet another foreign conflict - this time launching strikes on Iran - the visual language of power takes centre stage. In moments of war, images do not merely accompany policy; they become policy. They shape perception, dictate allegiance, and manufacture resolve.
These two photographs, released in the hours following the strikes, show President Donald Trump in settings designed to exude control. But look closer, and something more sinister - and absurd - emerges. The first is a carefully staged press conference, a tableau of power drawn straight from the authoritarian playbook. The second, a Situation Room image so visually discordant it veers into political parody.
Together, they expose the twin faces of Trump’s second presidency: the strongman and the showman. War is not only being waged on the ground, but also on the screen, in the theatre of leadership, through the aesthetics of dominance
Image One: The Strongman Tableau
In this image, Trump stands at a podium bearing the seal of the President of the United States. Flanked by political allies - J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio (partially obscured), and Pete Hegseth - he delivers what is nominally a press conference. But there are no questions. There is no engagement. Only declaration.
The framing is deliberate, symmetrical, cinematic. The corridor behind is softly lit, a visual vanishing point that pulls focus forward to the men occupying the foreground. Each is clad in dark suits, starched shirts, and patriotically themed ties. Their expressions range from stern to inscrutable. The effect is unmistakable: this is not a team of advisors. It is a cadre.
While the American flag lapel pin badges are a standard feature of U.S. political dress, in this context they seem to reinforce uniformity rather than individuality. It is not the pins themselves, but the staging around them, that signals the ideological intent. Dissent, debate, even nuance - these have no place in the frame. What we see is command and compliance.
This is political choreography masquerading as governance. It is power posed, not earned.
In the context of the strikes on Iran, this image performs a secondary function: it communicates resolve. But it is a particular kind of resolve, one rooted not in diplomacy, nor in moral authority, but in brute dominance. This is the language of punitive spectacle.
Image Two: The Situation Room as Spectacle
If the first image seeks to emulate strength, the second reveals something closer to absurdity. Here, Trump is pictured in the Situation Room, seated beneath the seal of the President. The American flag and the presidential standard flank him. But instead of gravitas, we are presented with theatre.
Trump is slouched in his chair, his face reddened and ringed by stark white eye circles - whether from makeup or lighting, the effect is surreal. He wears a bright red ‘MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN’ cap, a campaign slogan now absurdly inserted into a moment of military deliberation. The blue suit and red tie remain, but the cap breaks the illusion of statesmanship. This is not a commander-in-chief. This is a brand ambassador.
The Situation Room is meant to be a space of sobriety. Here, it has been reimagined as a campaign set.
The foreground is cluttered with plastic bottles, takeaway coffee cups, and scattered papers. The composition lacks the visual clarity of the first image - suggesting not control, but chaos. The saturation is high, the colours pop almost garishly. The MAGA hat is not just visible - it dominates the image. It reframes the war room as a war studio, the presidency as performance.
Crucially, this image does not command authority, it demands attention. And in doing so, it lays bare the collapse of traditional statecraft into a spectacle of self-promotion.
Between Symbolism and Substance
Together, these images operate as dual projections of Trump’s leadership in wartime. The first is crafted to communicate stability and unity - a return to the aesthetics of Cold War command. The second ruptures that illusion, revealing a presidency incapable of separating governance from marketing.
Both, however, are complicit in something deeper: the visual manipulation of national trauma. As the world reels from a new wave of Middle East violence, with Iranian cities under fire and global tensions on a knife’s edge, these images do not offer answers. They offer optics.
They sell us the idea of order but deliver only obedience. They trade in the language of leadership but speak only in slogans. They ask us to trust, but, along with Iran, demand we submit.
Conclusion: When Image Becomes Weapon
In times of war, the role of the image is not neutral. It can be a shield. It can be a sword. In Trump’s America, it is both. The press conference image performs strength; the Situation Room photo burlesques it. But neither depicts deliberation, responsibility, or remorse.
These are not portraits of a democracy at work. They are scenes from a pageant of power - broadcast for domestic approval, and foreign intimidation.
In the age of endless war and endless screens, what we see matters as much as what is done. And what we see, here, is chilling: a regime that brutalises with one hand, and brands itself with the other.
If you value this kind of writing, please consider subscribing to Plague Island.
We don’t hide our work behind a paywall, because we want it to be read. But if you can support it, we’ll use that support to keep writing more, and writing better.
Paid subscribers receive early access, behind-the-scenes newsletters, and the chance to shape future essays.
We write with rigour, we cite everything, and we answer only to our readers.
Or please support us with a one-off tip → Buy Me a Coffee