Abstract
Trumpism is deeply connected to neoconservatism, with the former being seen as a modern version of the latter. Politicians make decisions based on social issues and trends, while political science is a summary and generalization of these practices. Trumpism is not based on political science theory, but is a product of the real political and social environment of the United States. It emerged against the backdrop of America's socio-economic and cultural contradictions, challenging traditional political order, and is heavily influenced by neoconservatism. Neoconservatism combines the values of traditional conservatism with individualism and free-market concepts, particularly opposing the countercultural movements since the 1960s, such as the hippie phenomenon. Trumpism inherits the core characteristics of neoconservatism, especially in its positions on issues like culture, immigration, and globalization. The core ideas of Trumpism include "Make America Great Again" (MAGA), which emphasizes cultural independence and confidence; "returning to common sense," winning grassroots support and challenging the establishment; opposition to illegal immigration and its associated social and cultural issues; anti-establishment, especially against bureaucracy and corruption; promotion of anti-globalization policies, emphasizing "America First" protectionist trade policies; and opposition to progressivism, advocating for religious revivalism and cultural conservatism. These stances reflect the ideas of neoconservatism, particularly in military, economic, and socio-cultural aspects. Through the combination of policy and social movements, Trumpism has altered the American political landscape and may impact global politics. As global ideologies become more diverse, Trumpism's influence may shape new political, cultural, and economic structures in the coming decades. Trumpism is not only a rebellion against progressivism but also a symbol of the rise of neoconservatism, potentially driving similar political changes worldwide. Ultimately, Trumpism may integrate into the establishment and continue to shape the global political environment.
Keywords: American politics, Trumpism, neoconservatism, progressivism
1. The relationship between politics and political science
Politics and political science are fundamentally different. Politicians, indeed politics itself always try to lead, which is an instinct that makes such individuals political leaders. Therefore, politicians do not choose a particular ideological system and then begin to implement it; most people would typically view this as a form of "political practice". What politicians actually do is identify the biggest issues in society, capture the trends within them, and offer a call to action and positioning to resolve them, ultimately becoming the most prominent leaders. Political success essentially comes in two forms. One is institutional success, which mainly relies on social systems such as laws, state governance, and academic channels, achieved through social competition. The other is non-institutional success, which largely depends on leading social movements, wars, or revolutions. This form of success is often vaguely referred to, as it possesses some degree of ambiguity, as "populism".
Political science is reactive. It is an induction, summary, and categorization of political practice. In other words, it follows behind political practice, observing and summarizing what it sees, breaking things down, classifying them, and synthesizing it all to form the research outcomes. This summary of political science is based on different perspectives, with the most common being represented and reflected by philosophy, political science, and other disciplines. Their work is similar, and their terminology is also similar, but the most common application is for political propaganda purposes. One thing to note is that political science is also quite difficult, which is why it is referred to as a "science". The work of breaking things down, classifying, and categorizing is no easy task. The volume of data is overwhelming, and making incorrect generalizations or entering the wrong field can lead to embarrassment. Therefore, calling it political science makes sense, but at the same time, one should not overestimate the status and utility of political science, and this is necessary to keep in mind.
Therefore, politics comes first, and political science comes afterward. This is the essential relationship between politics and political science. The addition of the word "science" actually defines everything for the "informed" and clarifies the instrumental role of political science. It cannot surpass politics; it can only be a summary, generalization, and the interweaving of conceptual definitions. It is always "after the fact" and mainly provides assistance for learning and propaganda.
We have indeed seen politics driven by a certain nominal belief, such as religion, revolution, and social movements. They have made a significant impact in the world, but this has not changed the relationship between politics and political science. This is because such political actions, driven by political theories based on belief, are not the result of creating political theories and then following a step-by-step approach. These so-called belief-driven political actions are all part of an existing and complete political theoretical system, and at most, they are a continuation or branch of it. This is a political chain reaction. It has not altered the relationship between politics and political science.
One point to note is that although I mentioned the concept of "Trumpism", it has absolutely no relation to political science. This concept was entirely based on the need for policy research and the conclusions drawn from analysis. The time when it was introduced was probably when the Republican Party was preparing to announce its candidate. I must admit that at the time, it was uncertain whether Trump could win the election, so instead of directly running for office, it seemed more effective for Trump to form his ideas into "Trumpism" to influence and support the Republican Party's younger candidates. The reason for this line of thinking was entirely based on my judgment of the basic situation in American society, including the economic situation and the main social contradictions, and my understanding that the Republican Party and the conservative side would likely win the U.S. election. Hence, my mentions of the concept of "Trumpism" at that time was not based on political science theory, but rather on the practical needs of American realpolitik and political victory at that time.
2. The Origin and the Concept of Trumpism
From the perspective of political science, Trumpism is closely related to conservatism, especially neoconservatism. In fact, they are like siblings, and it can even be said that Trumpism is the new mainstream ideology of neoconservatism in the modern era. There is a saying that in 1973, Michael Harrington, a writer who supported democratic socialism, coined the term "neoconservatism" to describe those who, dissatisfied with the policies implemented by the Democratic Party, turned to conservatism. Furthermore, political scientist Leo Strauss can be seen as one of the founders of neoconservatism, while journalist Irving Kristol is considered a founder of neoconservatism for his many ideas that later became core beliefs of the movement.
In political science, because it is necessary to trace the lineage of factions, categorization has become a necessity. As a result, a priori labels are placed, then such labels are promoted. In reality, from an absolute perspective, for every theoretical concept creator, there is always an earlier proposer before them. The so-called "proposer", "creator", or "definer" in social sciences are actually relative, unreliable terms, dependent on media influence and the potential for dissemination. This is something done for the sake of political science, which is a data-driven discipline that cannot truly be called a science, and it does not represent a genuine scientific scenario.
Generally speaking, neoconservatism is a "variant of the political ideology of conservatism that combines features of traditional conservatism with political individualism and a qualified endorsement of free markets", and shows a "disdain for the counterculture of the 1960s" (Encyclopædia Britannica). From this definition, it is clear that neoconservatism mainly opposes the countercultural social movements that have flourished since the 1960s, such as the hippies of the past and the LGBT movement today. Therefore, it is easy to understand why today's Trumpism strongly opposes DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion), having dismantled all DEI offices in federal agencies and pressured universities and companies to eliminate DEI programs, because this is completely in line with the neoconservative tradition.
3. The Relationship Between Trumpism and Neoconservatism
We might examine the relationship and changes between neoconservatism and Trumpism from the perspective of political science criticism.
Political science in the past believed that neoconservatism was called "neo" for two main reasons. First, the individuals who proposed this ideology in the previous century came from liberal and socialist backgrounds. They emerged from the post-World War II socialist surge, which is why it is considered a new form of conservatism, especially in contrast to the internationalism of that time. Second, many of the ideas of neoconservatism were derived from the intellectual roots of the post-World War II period, including literary criticism and social sciences. Neoconservatism turned all knowledge into an ideological framework. Compared to old conservatism, which had traditions of protectionism and isolationism, neoconservatism is characterized by interventionism. This means that the neoconservatism of that period emphasized military intervention.
The key principles of Trumpism have become much clearer over time. Since Trump's ascension to power, these principles have been translated into public policies, allowing for a more concise summary. This stands in contrast to the period when I was conducting research on Trumpism. At that time, Trump had not yet made the decision to run for office. Consequently, the policy inclinations of Trumpism were based entirely on the analysis and projections of research conducted during that period. However, when comparing the present to the past, the differences are minimal, indicating that the definition of Trumpism at that time was indeed accurate.
The core principles of Trumpism today can be summarized as follows:
1: Make America Great Again (MAGA): This concept has now become very broad, with its most prominent aspects being cultural significance and ideological positioning. America's greatness means that the U.S. is no longer a culture influenced by European traditions or a colonized culture, but rather a unique culture, a unique ideology, i.e., a cultural independence. Europe, China, Russia, and the entire world must acknowledge this, and at least Russia has already done so, as Vladimir Putin himself is a neoconservative. Europe, however, strongly opposes this, as seen in the Munich Security Conference. Other countries have yet to fully recognize the specific cultural and ideological shifts embedded in the MAGA movement.
2. Return to Common Sense: The main phrase through which Trumpism gained social support is "common sense". Through it, Trumpism has secured an advantage that transcends the law and established institutions, rallying supporters and building its social movement. Trumpism originated entirely from the grassroots, rising as a movement from the people, and even though the Democratic Party controls nearly all mainstream media, it has been unable to counteract it. Therefore, Trump is a president of popular will, and the way he continues to exercise this popular power is through returning to "common sense".
3. Anti-immigration: To be precise, it is anti-illegal immigration, not anti-immigration. The United States has always been a society built on immigration, and this has never changed, even during the McCarthy era. Therefore, as a new form of conservatism, Trumpism opposes illegal immigration, which is essentially opposition to the cultural transformation and crime waves brought about by immigration. For example, in the UK today, the original ethnic majority has dwindled to around 3.9 million, and the majority of the population is now made up of immigrants from Eastern Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, Africa, Asia, India, and Pakistan. This scale of immigration has led to substantial changes in British society, and the British monarch has effectively become the monarch of the "Emirate of the United Kingdom of Great Britain", raising concerns that these changes may be irreversible.
4. Anti-establishment: Starting in the 1970s, the anti-establishment figures of that time have long since become the establishment. The youths who were once part of the countercultural movement, along with their successors, have continued to dominate national development, carrying deeply rooted left-wing ideologies. Like the early leftists, they are adept at slogans, concepts, and presentations, but lack practical execution, hence the inefficiency. Once things become routine, it is not hard to imagine that they are more entangled with bureaucracy and corruption. Therefore, Trumpism pushes for anti-corruption measures, with the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) led by Elon Musk, becoming the main method and approach for its anti-establishment stance. From the perspective of being anti-establishment, this movement originally emerged from neoconservatism, and now, it is simply the anti-establishment's version of anti-establishment. Thus, Trumpism is inherently linked to neoconservatism, as it promotes the latter.
5. Anti-globalization: The fragmentation of global space is an objective reality, so is the beginning of de-globalization. Therefore, the shift from multilateral mechanisms to bilateral ones is inevitable. Trumpism has a deep, foundational conflict with global integration multilateral organizations like the European Union. "America First" and trade protectionism are core demands of Trumpism. As a result, isolationism and trade protectionism, the typical characteristics of neoconservative thought, reappear within the framework of Trumpism, reflecting the close relationship between Trumpism and neoconservatism.
6. Anti-progressivism: Progressivism is a political movement and ideology that began in North America in the late 19th century, originally to address the needs arising from the outbreak of World War I. Progressives, to some extent, held the position of spiritual leaders, advocating for "progress" in areas defined by human rights, justice, and fairness. They were also key supporters of left-wing ideas such as the welfare state and antitrust laws. As the pendulum swings, Trumpism's anti-progressivism is essentially a return to earlier ideals. In fact, the opposition to new culture is a hallmark of neoconservatism. Thus, it is not surprising that the Trump administration targets cultural privileges like DEI and LGBT rights politically, while strongly promoting religious revival, the intellectual territory of neoconservatism. Interestingly, the opposition to privilege was at the core of Martin Luther King Jr.'s civil rights philosophy. This is also why some argue that neoconservatism is, at its core, rooted in liberal thought. Ultimately, everything is relative.
7. Mercantilism: Neoconservatism's economic tendency has always focused on production, emphasizing supply-side economics, and Trumpism is no different. The Trump administration has implemented a series of measures to lift the restrictions imposed by the Democratic government, including in areas like climate and energy, while also emphasizing "Made in America". These are a direct result of conservative thought guiding policy.
8. Power-based transactionalism: In its original context, neoconservatism supported interventionism, frequently advocating for military interventions. In the current era, however, this characteristic of neoconservatism has evolved, with Trumpism replacing it with power-based transactions, that is, using a position of strength to impose bilateral and potentially multilateral agreements to achieve the same "intervention" objectives. This approach has become more common in situations like the war in Ukraine and trade wars.
It is important to clarify that the term "transactionalism" used above is not entirely accurate. Trump is a businessman; he enjoys making deals and takes pride in successful transactions. Therefore, he may favor this approach. It is also possible that under the influence of Trumpism, it could become a popular trend in global geopolitics, replacing traditional diplomatic orders and creating new diplomatic norms, leading people to believe that "politics is just transactions". However, one crucial point is that the emergence of Trumpism means that the United States will likely continue pursuing Trumpism for a long time. At that point, power may very well be in the hands of non-businesspeople, and it would no longer be the "transactional" era. Therefore, in this sense, transactionalism is merely a characteristic of the method, not the core essence of Trumpism.
4. Trumpism's Impact and Its Future
All in all, Trumpism is a form of neoconservatism that runs counter to the global progressive trend. Since World War II, progressivism has shifted from left-wing to far-left, with its aggressive and confrontational influence having a significant impact, damaging the social integration system, and even reaching a point of regressive policies. Examples include U.S. laws mandating protection for child gender reassignment surgeries and UK laws stating that burning the Bible is not a crime, but burning the Quran is considered a crime, among others. Such policies have become deeply unpopular. Additionally, pluralism has increasingly morphed into cultural hegemony, such as the DEI and gender culture privileges. All of this reflects an ever-growing and more unapologetic cultural aggression, commonly referred to as "political correctness". It is this cultural aggression, rather than the so-called cultural inclusiveness claimed by progressives, that has sparked strong social backlash, leading to disruptive changes in American society. To this day, the U.S. Democratic Party has failed to understand what led to their crushing defeat in the 2024 election. When they realized many issues could no longer be concealed, they resorted to mobilizing intellectual-controlled media outlets to openly fabricate stories, allowing false culture to flourish. This not only damaged their credibility but also intensified the failure of progressivism and contributed to the success of Trumpism.
Of course, the definition of progressivism is rather broad, incorporating multifaceted ideas such as internationalism. It played a pivotal role in the reconstruction efforts following World War II. In the aftermath of the war, particularly with the United States' substantial investments in initiatives like the Marshall Plan, there was a pressing need for a coherent theoretical framework to underpin these efforts. This context gave rise to progressivism as a defining force. As new generations of intellectuals ascended to the forefront of societal discourse, they facilitated the deep integration of progressivism within the political establishment, giving birth to a modern, institutionalized establishment. The issue at hand today, however, is that progressivism has overstepped its bounds. This has led to its entrenchment within the governance failures of many nations. Furthermore, constrained by its institutional roots, progressivism has struggled to adapt to the fragmentation of global power structures and the dominance of regional hegemonies. Under such circumstances, Trumpism has emerged as a compelling political narrative, shaping the lexicon of contemporary geopolitics.
Trumpism is, in essence, a modern-day victory for neoconservatism. It is precisely for this reason that it holds far-reaching social significance, extending well beyond the realm of political science. It is likely to remain influential for a long period, even decades, and may transcend American society, becoming a dominant ideological force that impacts culture, literature, philosophy, and other societal spheres. The construction of a conservative image across various social layers is poised for a comprehensive resurgence. At the same time, Trumpism will likely converge with the establishment, as all political theories eventually do, gradually becoming an integral part of the political establishment and evolving into a new establishment in its own right. When that happens, the world may once again begin to reassess the concept of "progressivism" and its significance. Politics operates in cycles, as both individuals and their environments exhibit cyclical patterns. Thus, progressivism cannot be wholly dismissed; it has its own positive contributions and its own time-bound relevance.
It is worth noting the global impact of Trumpism, which may not be a topic of political science per se, is nonetheless a critical issue in policy research and analysis, as it is a trend that requires to be understood. The current plausible conclusion is that theories such as the multipolar and unipolar world have lost their relevance and appear outdated. Grand geopolitical visions have lost their significance, and the world will no longer experience the kind of ideological division or solidified blocs that existed in the past. Instead, we are entering a new global paradigm where multiple ideologies coexist. Even within the traditional Western bloc, there will be starkly differing ideologies and political philosophies. As a result, the division of the world into ideological camps has essentially lost its meaning. The world has entered an era dominated by bilateral relationships, where everything hinges on the geopolitical strategies between individual countries, with the ability to gain an advantage in highly complex political maneuvering.
The institutional environment within countries may give way to social movements, with national society and institutional governance taking a secondary role, as social movements assume the dominant power. The era of movements will once again sweep across the world. This scenario closely resembles the world before World War I. This is the reality, a transitional phase in the process of institutional reconstruction. Before the global mainstream ideologies make a full return, people must adapt to this new era, and the corresponding political ecology must evolve accordingly. This often involves the deep integration of politics with culture, philosophy, communication, geopolitics, and analytical sciences. In an era defined by powerful social movements, success lies in leading and maintaining a dominant position within these movements, using the role of a spiritual leader to shape them into the prevailing force.
From an economic perspective, the foundation is crucial. Conservatism has always emphasized the supply-side, focusing on production. A strong economic base is essential for political influence and dominance in social movements. Therefore, GDP size, technological leadership in production, and reasonable price levels are all vital. In fact, the era of Trumpism and neoconservatism is fundamentally a "CPI era", where the CPI index holds significant power, influencing political processes. Argentinian President Javier Milei succeeded by focusing on the CPI, and if the Trump administration fails to control it, it may lead to failure. I believe that in the case of Trumpism in the U.S., a 4% CPI will likely determine its future, serving as a subtle yet critical threshold.
Finally, it should be mentioned that from a practical perspective, the relationship between politics and political science indicates the latter is not as important as commonly imagined. Policy research and analysis, on the other hand, are the scientific systems that have a decisive influence on the political future of a country.
