As Trump returns to the White House, what, exactly, is the ideology of Trumpism? Ruairidh Brown argues that Trump’s America First agenda is, at its core, Machiavellian
In 2020, US President Joe Biden declared his victory meant American exceptionalism – the belief that the US has the moral responsibility to lead and defend the free and democratic world – was back. Trump was just a blip in US history.
Four years later, with Trump’s landslide victory, Biden’s attempt to return the US to this moral leadership role has failed. The press declares American exceptionalism is dead. Long live Trump’s America First – at least for the next four years.
Many scholars have tried to work out what ‘America First’ means, beyond a slogan. What ideology will drive Trump’s foreign policy?
Trump is a realist, and classical realism emphasises the importance of power in politics contra theories constructed around moral and idealistic worldviews, such as liberalism and socialism.
The Twenty Years' Crisis, 1919–39 by British political scientist EH Carr is a cornerstone of the classical realist canon. The book stressed the importance of power over the utopianism Carr believed dominated interwar thought and practice.
The clearest examples of this utopianism were the 1919 Versailles Settlement and the creation in 1920 of the League of Nations, which aimed to establish a liberal world order that excluded non-liberal states. The USSR and Germany, both powerful and influential, were notable exclusions. This new world order was thus out of sync with the reality of political power.
Trump focuses on the reality of US power and interest, not the utopian expectation that America must lead the free world
The realist reading of Trump would put him in the same camp as Carr: a figure focusing on the reality of US power and interest against the utopian expectation that America must lead the free world.
Indeed, scholars have suggested that Trump is continuing Barack Obama’s realist turn. The 44th President recognised that ‘it is beyond our means to right every wrong’. Subsequently, he argued, America had to temper its moral intent against the reality of US power and interest.
Such interpretations, however, overlook Trump's amorality.
Obama tempered American moral expectation with power realities, but he did not abandon it. Carr, too, argued for the importance of power in politics, but he still believed foreign policy required a moral vision.
Trump, by contrast, acts without concern for moral right or wrong.
Take Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Trump has refused to see a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ on either side:
Instead, he merely seeks to end the conflict rapidly because of the billions of dollars the US gives to the ‘great salesman’ Zelenskyy.
Trump frames the Taiwan question in equally amoral terms. Taiwan, he says, is merely an ‘insurance client’ of the US – and if they don’t pay their premiums, they deserve to be abandoned.
Though he claims to seek peace, Trump still threatens force to get the ‘best deal’. Indeed, he has warned his negotiating strategy 'will be met with fire and fury':
The spectre of violence threatens not only traditional enemies but allies, too. By intimidating NATO members who ‘don’t pay’, Trump encourages Russa to do 'whatever the hell they want' to those countries:
Trump is prepared to use any means necessary to secure the ‘best deal’ for the US. During the Covid-19 pandemic, for example, he used emergency legislation to redirect vital supplies from European allies to the US, a move German officials described as 'modern piracy'.
In none of these cases does morality factor into Trump’s calculations. He does not seek to balance moral vision with power, as the classical realists did. Rather, he acts amorally in the pursuit of US power and interest.
Such amoralism suggests that Trump is not a realist, but that his ideology is more akin to that of the sixteenth-century Italian philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli, because Machiavellian political decision making ignores the moral aspect.
Machiavelli’s best-known work The Prince is notorious for its evaluation of political action only in so far as it contributed to the maintenance of power. Its author remained silent on any notion of moral framework of judgement:
Machiavelli's Discourses, while favouring republican government over principalities, nevertheless considered political action only insofar as it increased the power of the republic. Again, Machiavelli advised acting only to achieve what was in the interests of the polity, regardless of the morality of how it was achieved. Philosopher Leo Strauss called such republican patriotism collective selfishness.
The aim of America First is to pursue the 'best deal' for the US, regardless of morality
Trump’s America First, too, is a case of amoral collective selfishness. Its aim is to pursue the ‘best deal’ for the US, regardless of morality and in spite of the harm it might cause others.
As Carr observed, 'Machiavellian' is often used as an insult. It is important, therefore, to note there can be benefits to Machiavellianism.
Free from a moral imperative to defend the free world, the US is less likely to escalate tensions in Ukraine or Taiwan into an ideological struggle between democracy and autocracy. This will likely avoid a new Cold War situation, a scenario that was distinctly possible under Biden’s exceptionalism.
Free from a moral imperative to defend the free world, the US is less likely to escalate tensions in Ukraine or Taiwan
However, it may also weaken the US’s global standing in the long term.
US hegemony is sustained via material might, but also by a moral vision which other nations share and which contributes to trust and friendship. This is the foundation on which the postwar US liberal world order has been built.
The amoralism of America First loses this normative vision. Under an amoral Trump leadership, the US risks becoming a self-centred state prepared to bully and threaten adversaries and allies to ensure it gets the ‘best deal’. This will doubtless erode trust and amity, wearing away Washington's normative authority, and leaving it only material power.
Abandoning American exceptionalism and embracing amorality may free the US of the burden of defending democracy and freedom; the burden of being the world’s policeman. Nevertheless, in Trump’s amoral international order, it should not then surprise us if this new Machiavellian America comes to be seen as the world’s most bombastic pirate.
Ruairidh currently teaches International Political Theory and International Relations at Forward’s Lisbon Campus.
Before teaching at Forward, Ruairidh taught International Studies in mainland China, where he received the University of Nottingham’s Lord Dearing Award for outstanding contributions to teaching and learning in 2019.
He received his PhD from the University of St Andrews in 2017.
Ruairidh has researched and published on such topics as hermeneutics, political obligation, and the philosophy of friendship.
Political Encounters: A Hermeneutic Inquiry Into the Situation of Political Obligation
Springer, 2019
COVID-19 and International Political Theory: Assessing the Potential for Normative Shift
Springer, 2022
"Trump’s landslide victory."
Trump won by 1.6% over the vice president and just under 50% ( 49.9% ) of the popular vote. One of the smallest margins in election history.
https://www.google.com/search?q=election+results+2024&iflsig=AL9hbdgAAAAAZ1vKmqFDXcUX3O4dfIiOc9snZqOhzOTX
The Balkans are steeped in history and very much in the middle of today’s geopolitical great game and are aware of the destabilizing Balkan wars of the late 20th century, and are surely aware of the spark that started World War I, when Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in Sarajevo, Serbia, leading the great powers to start World War I. The bombing of Serbian forces by NATO in the 1990s is still fresh in the memory of most of the Balkans and Russians.
Today, the most obvious and underreported influence in the Western Balkans is Turkey, where President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is promoting a greater role for Islam socially and politically in Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia and Bosnia. Today it is hard to miss the veils worn on the streets and the new mosques being built in Albania, Kosovo, Macedonia and Bosnia.
Serbia is one of Russia's main supporters in Europe. Hungarian-born American George Soros (born György Schwartz; August 12, 1930) wants Serbia to change the course of their policies supporting Russia. Soros has decided to remove all obstacles and overthrow the current government of Serbia and in this way bring to power new political forces that are anti-Russian. Soros financed all the revolutions in South-Eastern Europe and directly financed the independence of Kosovo and was active with his foundations during the wars in the Balkans. This work, which got his branch in Belarus, was expelled in 1997. Soros’ definition of democracy means people electing only candidates of whom he approves.
George Soros played a key role in the dramatic overthrow last year of President Slobodan Milosevic. His Soros Foundations Network helped finance several groups, including the student organization Otpor, which spearheaded resistance to the patriotic Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic. Soros’ branch in Belgrade, the Yugoslav and Serbian capital, was among the earliest backers of Otpor, which grew under young and decentralized leadership to strengthen the fractured opposition to Milosevic. The vast majority of groups funded by Soros are not nearly as powerful as Otpor, nor do they play for such huge stakes.
Soros has given particular focus in creating political unrest to Eastern European countries, including his native Hungary and is long accused by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Mihály Orbán of meddling in Hungary’s affairs. The U.S. State Department often teamed up with Soros to “promote democracy” in Eastern European countries.This often consisted of targeting nationalist governments by infusing socially liberal propaganda through NGOs and Western-sponsored media—often going so far as to influence those countries’ elections.
Soros has no chance of winning a popularity contest among the Eastern Europeans. Sorism exploits the disdain for the billionaire. Politicians criticizing Soros’ influence were portrayed as senseless conspiracy theorists who imagine that rich overlords rule the world. The minute you do so, you’re immediately labeled some sort of conspiracy theorist.
From time to time, Soros is the subject of Romanian and Serbian politics. Soros sees Romania and Serbia as his own business where he can pursue his business interests. This man, who has been creating various organizations in Romania and Serbia since the 90s has only financed the worst; the missions he funded never benefited Romania and Serbia.
George Soros was once best known as the speculator who “broke the Bank of England” by reputedly making $1 billion in a single week in September 1992 betting against the British pound. In the mid-1990s, in addition to the tax and currency violations that drove the George Soros network out of Belarus, branches in Yugoslavia, Albania, Kyrgyzstan and Croatia, were accused of shielding spies and breaking currency laws.
George Soros is behind the migration crisis in Europe and the European Union is governed by unelected officials, and represents the interests of multinational companies.
George Soros with one of the major generators of what is called open society which means in many countries creating revolutions and making huge impact on the society especially in Eastern Europe who was encouraging refugees to come to Europe.
The goal of George Soros organizations and foreign mercenaries is anti-Russian and anti-Orthodox action and promotion of LGBT propaganda. They want to intensify the march of the political-globalist West towards the East, and direct their forces to where the front is most relevant and where it is expected to intensify. Soros’ mercenaries are destroying the Serbian Orthodox tradition and promoting Western values in the Serbian public space.
In the last 35 years, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, there has been a massive lack of democracy in the Western world. When the Soviet Union existed all the democracies around Western world were obliged to confirm in their Parliament's that there is a democracy and they are not just conveying what the people from the shadow or today what is called the corporate world is telling to the politicians what to do.
Western democracies are not any more real democracies, they are much more corporative driven politically correct societies.
The Power centers in the Western countries have been sabotaging Serbia for a long time because the West does not want a strong Serbia strengthening its economy, protecting and defending its territory. The Power centers in the Western countries want Serbia on its knees, weak and obedient, Serbia which delivers on their requests and ultimatums.
Foreign intelligence agencies had developed a plan aimed at the collapse of Serbia, politically and economically and looking for young Serbians who would do things like organizing protests on their behalf. Western megaphones received millions, and the media and the NGOs have been denunciating Serbia for money received from Western governments, embassies, organizations backed by Rothschild, Rockefeller, Soros, European Commission and various funds for the development of democracy.
The Serbian politician and diplomat Vladimir Krsljaninhas been one of the most prominent advocates of close cooperation between Serbia and Russia for decades. He was a high-ranking official in the Serbian Socialist Party of Slobodan Milosevic. Today opposition parties in Serbia are attempting to exploit the tragedies for the promotion of their own interests.
West is acting in Ukraine as it did in Kosovo. The Western NATO masters are on the offensive and are ordering Serbia to go down on its knees and capitulate. German politicians were talking about a glorious EU future while dismembering the Serbian state.
The New World - Serbia, Russia, and China — the future has begun.
Most years Bethlehem basks in the central place it holds in the Christian story of Jesus' life, born there in a stable because there was no room for his parents at the inn, and placed in an animal's manger, the humblest of all possible beds. The normally bustling biblical birthplace of Jesus "Bethlehem" now looks like a ghost town. With Israel's war in Gaza having killed more than 43,000 people, the mostly Palestinian population of Bethlehem in the Occupied West Bank are in mourning too.
As Bethlehem prepares to mark its second Christmas under the shadow of the war in Gaza, for the second straight year, Bethlehem’s Christmas celebrations will be somber and muted, in deference to ongoing war in Gaza. Israel’s war in Gaza has been raging for nearly 15 months, and there still is no end in sight.
Like Christ, Russia is conducting a war to save the world and the only two possibilities are Russia's victory or the annihilation of humanity.