By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The U.S. Commission of Fine Arts has approved a design for a new commemorative gold coin featuring President Trump’s portrait on one side, a move that departs from a long-standing federal law prohibiting living individuals from appearing on U.S. coinage. This decision also breaks a tradition dating back to the nation’s founding. The Trump administration asserts the Treasury Department possesses the necessary authority for this exception.
Read the original article here
The notion of a gold coin bearing the likeness of a living former president, especially Donald Trump, is far from being a standard or expected occurrence. It immediately steps outside the established norms of currency and commemorative items. Typically, depictions on official coinage are reserved for deceased figures, historical milestones, or symbolic representations of national ideals, not for individuals actively participating in the political landscape. This deviation from precedent is what makes the Trump gold coin so peculiar, bordering on the bizarre.
The visual representation itself on these coins seems to be a point of contention and significant departure from what one might consider a dignified or even accurate portrayal. Many observers note that the image lacks a true resemblance, often appearing more like a caricature than a genuine likeness. The depicted facial expressions are frequently described as menacing, cranky, or even constipated, conjuring less an image of presidential gravitas and more of an awkward, perhaps even pathetic, public figure. The pose, too, has drawn considerable commentary, with comparisons ranging from an uncomfortable medical examination to an elderly person rushing for a meal.
Furthermore, the very idea of a living president, or in this case, a former president, being immortalized on a coin intended for circulation, or even as a high-value collectible, raises legal and ethical questions. There’s a clear understanding that living presidents are generally not allowed to be featured on official currency. The “Trump coin” appears to circumvent or outright ignore this established convention, suggesting a willingness to bend or break rules to achieve a desired outcome. This defiance of established protocols is a hallmark of what many perceive as an ongoing departure from normalcy.
The materials and marketing of this coin also contribute to its unusual status. While purportedly a “gold coin,” there are observations that it might actually be silver, further blurring the lines of authenticity and intent. The association with “MAGATS” and the suggestion that these coins are primarily for fervent supporters of a particular political movement also highlight a departure from broad national commemorative efforts. Instead, it appears to be a deeply partisan endeavor, wrapped in the guise of historical or patriotic symbolism, which is fundamentally not how such items are typically conceived.
The act of creating such a coin can be seen as a manifestation of a broader pattern of behavior that has been labeled as “not normal” since a particular political era began. The argument is that this coin is not an isolated incident but rather a symptom of a larger trend where established traditions, rules, and even laws are disregarded. The inspiration for such an act is often drawn from historical figures who similarly disrupted norms, like Julius Caesar, whose depiction on coinage was a significant break from Roman Republican tradition and signaled his monarchical ambitions.
There’s a palpable sense of dismay and embarrassment associated with the Trump gold coin. It is viewed as an “eyesore” and a “disgrace,” particularly when considering the national context, such as the approaching anniversary of the nation’s founding. The coin is seen as a stark contrast to what such celebrations should represent, implying a decline in national pride and decorum. The persistent promotion and acceptance of such items are interpreted as a worrying sign of moral decline, a “moral injury” that many Americans are experiencing.
Moreover, the coin is sometimes linked to more disturbing and conspiratorial ideas, such as being the “mark of the beast,” indicating the extreme reactions it provokes in some segments of the population. These interpretations, while extreme, underscore the profound unease and sense of abnormality that the coin represents. The very fact that such an item is being seriously considered or produced speaks volumes about a political climate where the unconventional and the provocative are seemingly encouraged.
The financial aspects and the perceived intent behind the coin also raise concerns about corruption and insider dealings. The idea that such items are created to generate immense profits for those involved, potentially through dubious means like market manipulation, adds another layer of abnormality to the situation. The “Trump coin” is thus not merely a decorative object but a symbol entangled with accusations of greed and unethical practices.
Ultimately, the Trump gold coin is not normal because it defies established protocols for coinage, presents a questionable and often unflattering likeness of its subject, and is perceived as a symptom of a broader disregard for tradition and legality. It is seen as a deeply partisan artifact, steeped in controversy and viewed by many as an embarrassing and concerning departure from the expected standards of national representation and commemoration. The ongoing discussions and reactions surrounding it highlight a collective sense that something fundamental has shifted, and the creation of such a coin is a clear indicator of that unsettling change.