Donald Trump’s first actions as the owner of the White House show that he is not just a populist, and his statements are not just bright rhetoric. There is something more behind this. It can be assumed that his steps are determined by ideological attitudes that have settled deep enough in the politician’s consciousness and have become the basis of his administration’s line. Historians of the future will define this ideology more precisely and give it a name. Today, we can assume that Trumpism is, in principle, a conservative, anti-globalist, and partly nationalistic phenomenon. In economics, Trumpism is on the extreme right. Marxist ideas are alien to it and protectionist methods are extremely close to it. Trumpism is an ideological opponent of the Atlanticism, a concept in which the United States and Western Europe, based on a common history and common values, should act as a monolithic front in geopolitical affairs. Trumpism advocates traditional values; it has become an ideological opponent of the post-humanistic phenomena of postmodernism.
In general, this is an ideology that has not yet fully formed and is rather crude. At the same time, it quite boldly and stubbornly opposes the liberal canon that has formed the modern world of the collective West. Trumpism is convinced of its rightness, the unwavering fidelity of its worldview, and feels the strength and challenges the powerful hegemon of the Western politics – liberalism.
In the theory of political science, it is generally accepted that conservatism as a holistic and more or less monolithic theory arose as a reaction to the most striking manifestation of liberalism – the Great French Revolution. Then, at the end of the 18th century, the tribune and thinker of the British parliament, Edmund Burke, with furious fury attacked the French, who were destroying “centuries-old canons,” “leading their country to ruin,” and “opposing the ‘constitution’ given by God.” Burke’s ideas were supported by many, including the Russian Catherine the Great. It was in these very thoughts of Burke that the core theses of conservative thought were born, later formalized into a complete political theory.
Trumpism is anthologically conservative, but at the same time, it is characterized by a difficult-to-predict reaction within certain boundaries. Trumpism is alien to the ideas of the “Community of Nations” — ideas that have become a political credo, arising based on the theory of the English School, categorically asserting that it is common values that will unite and divide countries and not rational interests.
The unity of the West is a fairly new phenomenon. In part, the genesis of this harmony can be found in the post-war era, during the Cold War, when a popular enemy emerged in the form of the world Marxist movement and the mighty Soviet Union. And after the collapse of the bipolar world, the West became truly collective. Trump’s victory has effectively led to the destruction of this phenomenon. The West has become heterogeneous, which entails both positive and, incidentally, negative consequences. It has become less predictable. There is more of the West. It is no longer a single geopolitical unit and not a single actor in global processes. Trumpists are revolutionary by nature. The implementation of their ideology, theses, and stratagems is a revolution in American politics. Trump is trying to “refound” the United States or, as he puts it, return them to “the right roots.” Trumpists are not against revolutionary phenomena if they have a conservative nature. But they are for revolutions through elections. Hence the support for Eurosceptics and the piety towards conservative parties present at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in the United States.
Trump and his associates have conceived and are carrying out a large-scale purge of agents of the liberal canon and globalists. Hence the closure of USAID, an organization promoting American soft power and creating a network of paid agents around the world. At the same time, Trump is convinced that this agency has never spread American values, but has been engaged in the ineffective promotion of liberal ideas, which, in turn, are alien to truly American values. He also said: “We need to stop politicizing our intelligence agencies, which is why we have approved Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard” (a person who has become a black sheep in the national security system). A certain audit (if not a purge) and inventory of personnel is taking place in the United States government agencies.
That is, before he can start building or “refounding” his America, Trump needs to destroy the America of the liberals. And this is not an easy task. Some observers doubt that it can be called solvable at all. After their crushing defeat in the elections, liberal globalists have found refuge in European capitals. The EU bureaucracy has proven to be the clearest manifestation of the ideas, strategies, and policies of this clan of globalists. ball elites. They do not intend to retreat, they hate and despise Trump and his associates. It can be assumed that the entire term of the revolutionary president will be accompanied by a fairly fierce confrontation with the liberal part of America and the West. The United States has found itself in a situation where its internal political and social processes can be called, if not a cold civil war, then a confrontation.
Trump does not intend to seek compromises with his opponents either. They are his worst enemies, and he does not feel any piety towards them. However, the president may lose this confrontation. And then he will have to transform his foreign and domestic policies, make statements of a different nature, and “adjust” the strategy to the accepted standards of the liberal canon. And it does not matter at all whether they are effective or hopelessly outdated for the gradually emerging multipolar system of international relations.
For Russia, the general line of political processes in the United States is a positive phenomenon. At the same time, this process is difficult to predict. It entails both new opportunities and potential threats. Political systems always find it more convenient to act in a situation of clarity. When it is clear who the enemy and the friend are, it is possible to build a long-term strategy, adjust actions to it, appoint suitable personnel, and allocate resources. When there is no such clarity in the political process, it is quite difficult to navigate and even more difficult to make decisions.
Nevertheless, the global political situation is in Russia’s favor. The split of the Global West is beneficial to it. Moscow has acquired an ideological ally in Washington. At least for some time. Consequently, effective and rational realists in the Russian Federation could not help but take advantage of this opportunity and agree to the negotiation process. And then we will see who will win the Cold Civil War in the West.