Too many narcissists in the nest: Why Trump’s bromances were always bound to clash

Since Donald Trump assumed power for his second term, American politics has continued to horrify and terrorise in equal measure. At the centre has been the unexpected nexus of Trump and Elon Musk, with the latter assuming unprecedented power and influence on US political decisions.

When this unlikely pairing first became apparent, mental health clinicians, myself included, made wry remarks about it only being a matter of time before this relationship blew up; two narcissists do not often cooperate for any meaningful length of time.

Elon Musk and Peter Navarro have been trading barbs following the roll-out of Donald Trump’s tariffs.

Less than three months into Trump’s return to the White House, it looks as though we are now witnessing the deterioration of functioning between Trump and his short-term BFF via a well-publicised stoush on X between Musk and Trump’s top trade advisor, Peter Navarro.

This week, Musk pilloried Navarro, a key architect of Trump’s tariffs, saying the economist was “truly a moron” and “dumber than a sack of bricks”. Musk, the most prominent critic of the tariffs in Trump’s circle, also mocked Navarro for creating a false policy expert “Ron Vara” (an anagram of Navarro’s surname) and citing Vara as an economic expert in his writings. The Tesla founder repeatedly referred to Navarro as “Peter Retarrdo”.

In response, Navarro described Musk, unflatteringly but not incorrectly, as a “car assembler”.

Meanwhile, the White House trotted out the saccharine line “boys will be boys”; an inexcusably shallow response to two very powerful adults having public tantrums while controlling the global economic purse.

If these tit-for-tats weren’t occurring amid the imposition of tariffs that might decimate the global economy, they might be entertaining.

But it’s becoming increasingly clear that we might be dealing with significant personality pathologies among many involved in this administration, and the exacerbations which occur when this pathology is clustered with power, unfettered access to resources and lack of any external accountability.

This administration reminds me of a more sophisticated and powerful version of a unit for high-risk individuals in a prison who wish to acquire power for themselves regardless of the cost to others.

Though mental health clinicians cannot make statements about people’s diagnoses without assessing them, we are skilled at pattern recognition and can recognise harmful traits. While the label “narcissist” may or may not apply here in its truest form (ie a diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder), it’s clear that key players in Trump’s circle demonstrate a level of self-interest that is pathological in nature and harmful to others.

The standard practice for mental health or personality evaluations is a professional will conduct an interview with the patient and source additional information from other sources, such as family members, partners or long-time friends. In this instance, we don’t have a diagnostic interview, but we do possess decades of information and footage illustrating Trump and Musk’s respective behaviours, which offers us some understanding.

Behaviour is usually one of the best markers of personality pathology, and we can surmise attitudes, beliefs and emotions from what someone does. Actions tend to be better markers than verbal statements because all but the most brazen psychopath will make some attempt to say the right thing and imply some consideration, care and attention to good behaviour, while behavioural reports may indicate the opposite.

If I was assessing key members of the administration based on history of behaviour before me, I would be assessing for psychopathy due to the presence of behavioural markers including a lack of accountability, self-interest, deceitfulness, manipulativeness, grandiosity, entitlement, superficial charm, predatory behaviour, conning, diverse offences and poor emotional control.

People with narcissistic personalities often clash because in holding grandiose views about themselves, they can’t reconcile their own needs and views with those of others, or tolerate disagreement. When they perceive humiliation, narcissistic rage can sometimes occur – this is an intense and emotionally explosive reaction designed to equalise power and denigrate those who have inflicted the perceived humiliation.

In my forensic work, I’ve worked with clients who have murdered others in a fit of narcissistic rage. Doubling down on a stance, regardless of common sense, is also typical, as are verbal abuse, blame, projection and infliction of harm and punishment to those who have disagreed.

A situation like this, in which multiple people who may possess these traits hold this much power and work closely together, is unprecedented. The fallouts from disagreements have the potential to be nuclear and result in geopolitical and economic chaos – exactly what we’ve been seeing since January, and saw last time around.

Though there is no way of determining whether psychopathy or even narcissism exists within these individuals without a formal evaluation, asking the question is important. Because regardless of the genesis of these difficulties and specific labels, we are in hot water globally. When people in positions of power behave this way, we are all vulnerable, and will see bad behaviour crystallise and spread, as bullies feel emboldened to be “boys being boys”, and dissenting voices fall silent from fear.

Dr Ahona Guha is a clinical and forensic psychologist, trauma expert and author based in Melbourne.