Republican candidate Donald Trump declared an early victory on the morning of the 6th. Trump’s previous term was marked by unpredictable and controversial policies, both domestically and internationally. Once he returns to the White House, his brand of governance—dubbed the “Trump revolution”—will likely intensify. This raises questions: Could such a “revolution” reshape the U.S., or deepen its divisions? And how will social and economic powers influence this trajectory?
Zheng Yongnian, a prominent Chinese political economist and professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen), shared insights on the potential implications of Trump’s return..
Where does the current American ‘anger’ stem from, and what are the profound changes shaping the U.S. today?
Elections capture the core of U.S. politics, which are now deeply linked with global dynamics. American politics, shaped by decades of globalization, in turn, affects global developments. Today, nations view the U.S. through varied lenses, with reactions split along personal biases—some favoring Trump, others Harris. However, a shared concern is palpable, driven by what some term as the second revolution in the U.S., mirroring the transformative impact of its Independence War.
While Harris symbolizes continuity from an elite political tradition, Trump’s populist approach alarms many, especially given his promise of a Trump Revolution. This potential revolution signifies not violent upheaval, but radical policy shifts reshaping diverse interest groups.
Zheng identifies several groups, both domestic and international, deeply anxious about Trump’s potential return. Domestically, this includes political elites within both parties, marginalized social groups, and corporate leaders wary of his unpredictability. Internationally, close U.S. allies like Japan and South Korea, as well as global powers such as China and Russia, are concerned about possible isolationist policies.
Zheng draws parallels with historical revolutions, noting that unlike the French Revolution, driven by economic stagnation, the U.S. faces a crisis stemming from a thriving economy but misaligned governance structures. Figures like Elon Musk, supporting Trump, illustrate the divide between the economic base and outdated political systems. This “revolution” arises from dissonance between America’s economic forces and its political framework.
In Zheng’s view, the U.S. intelligentsia is largely detached from societal realities, clinging to ideals of democracy as the “end of history” without acknowledging the need for reform. This elite blindness echoes pre-Renaissance clerical defense of tradition. Today’s American revolution is not merely partisan but involves clashes between traditional and tech-driven industries, and between diverse social and racial groups.
So how has such a profound internal revolution for the United States changed its external policy?
As the world’s leading power, U.S. domestic shifts have substantial international effects. Internally, the U.S. has seen a “Trumpification” of its politics, where Trump’s influence permeates both major parties. While initially reshaping the Republican Party, Trump’s approach has gradually pushed the Democrats to adopt similar stances on key issues, such as tariffs and immigration.
In foreign policy, the U.S. prioritizes national interests under both administrations. Trump’s “America First” agenda and Biden’s “middle-class diplomacy” differ little in their focus on protective trade measures like tariffs. Immigration is another area where the Democrats are adjusting, reflecting broader public concerns, though Democrats maintain an emphasis on political correctness, covering issues like minority rights and climate change, where Trump diverges sharply.
On global cooperation, Trump’s exit from climate agreements contrasted with Biden’s re-engagement, but the commitment remains limited, as seen in the U.S.’s reduced climate actions amid the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Despite nuanced differences, the “Trumpification” of U.S. policies highlights a domestic and diplomatic convergence shaped by Trump’s legacy.
What do you make of the phenomenon where Trump is held in similar esteem to Reagan in recent Republican polls, especially considering his opposition to government corruption and alignment with anti-establishment sentiments?
The American spirit, often depicted in Hollywood’s hero narratives, has long celebrated figures who arise to meet societal needs. Figures like Reagan and Trump reflect this archetype, each arriving at critical junctures to appeal to citizens’ desires for decisive change. Reagan embodied a hero who tackled the era’s economic excesses through deregulation and tax cuts, championing globalization. Trump, by contrast, appeals to an anti-establishment, populist sentiment, opposing globalization’s outcomes, such as income inequality, that have alienated middle- and working-class Americans.
The fusion of labor and advanced technology interests in the U.S. today represents a synthesis unprecedented in American history. This restructuring reflects a new era where traditional political alignments of left and right are blurred. Trump’s brand of populism attempts to unify high-tech industry and labor, breaking with past political distinctions. This shift raises critical questions about the future of U.S. politics as AI and automation transform economic power dynamics.
Traditional Marxist ideas—where capital opposes labor—face challenges in explaining this alignment. With technological advances reducing the need for a large workforce, the emergence of a “pastoralist” social structure is possible, where economic elites support a reduced, “managed” labor class. This potential structure suggests that U.S. political reorganization is underpinned by profound economic shifts, where social structure, influenced by the economic base, shapes the political landscape. This reorientation highlights a moment in American society that defies traditional frameworks, suggesting that we are witnessing a unique transformation in U.S. socio-political structures.
Trump attempted to disrupt the U.S. foreign policy establishment during his first term but failed. With another chance at the White House, could he dismantle this establishment in his second term? If so, how would that impact the international order?
We’ve been examining U.S. internal dynamics, but it’s crucial to consider the international ripple effects as well. America’s allies, particularly those closely tied to the U.S., are the most concerned. Trump’s approach, including withdrawing from international treaties and offering limited support to allies, signaled a clear shift. Yet, even under Biden, with his Democratic platform, the dynamics of these alliances are not reverting to previous norms.
Historically, access to U.S. markets was a primary incentive for many allies. However, Biden’s focus on “middle-class diplomacy” does not involve significant market openings, even under initiatives like the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, which lacks provisions for U.S. market access. This approach reflects a broader trend of economic protectionism and cautious immigration policies that address U.S. domestic priorities.
In the context of the Russia-Ukraine war, the U.S. support has largely translated to indirect costs for the EU, who bears much of the immediate impact, while the U.S. benefits economically, particularly in arms sales. This underscores a strategic shift where the U.S. appears less inclined to shoulder the costs of global leadership, focusing instead on pragmatic economic gains. Regardless of the administration—whether Trump or a future Democratic leader like Harris—the U.S. is likely to continue shrinking its international commitments, albeit with different rhetorical styles. Trump’s diplomacy is blunt, while Biden (or Harris) might maintain a more traditional, yet perhaps less transparent, diplomatic front.
The essence of U.S. foreign policy now seems increasingly rooted in pragmatism, as it balances domestic demands with scaled-back global engagement, leaving allies to recalibrate their expectations of American leadership.
Source: Guancha, CNews
