>>It's hard to find examples of these savants succeeding in western history,

I usually look for the ones who pursue greater good despite cost for themselves. Go back no further than the founding fathers or leadup to the Civil War for examples. Since then, many professional politicians give up very little to pursue power, sometimes acquiring unnatural/unexpected wealth for themselves or their scions. They are not philosopher kings/queens usually. Others do well in professions or business, then see politics as a dreary civic duty for set period after which they gladly retire, unlike swampers who generally have to be defeated. How prophetic of the founders to mimic the Athenians and Spartans with set limits for some officeholders- but not all, unfortunately.

There's no term limit in NZ, but I'm reminded of NZ's former PM John Key who did very well in banking before his stint in politics. He donated his political salary to charity because he described his role as a "give it on" obligation to a society that allowed him to succeed from a solo parent upbringing in government housing. He also quit mid-term so a successor could prove their worth well in advance of election. Not sure Key qualifies as philosopher king - he was a banker after all - but he was closer than most of the rest of the swamp who confuse their own ambition with the greater good.

I would say that those assailing Trump are not philosopher kings or queens - far from it. Trump is never thought of as a philosopher king, but if you were African American or Hispanic, you might notice yet another employment record for the benefit of you and yours from a man in power for 2 years, but described by your 20-year do-little representatives as racist. If you rely on Medicare for your healthcare, it's strange to see people who have complained for years about excesses and toenail-clipping rorts, now enraged that Trump says reductions are possible from pharmaceutical savings and changes to hospital reimbursement. Both arguments have merit according to this student of healthcare funding, probably more than the ACA's certainty that savings from electronic health records would drive down healthcare premiums.