Nusrat Mirza
The portrayal of former President Donald Trump as an anti-establishment leader has been central to his political brand. His campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), resonates with those disillusioned by the political status quo, promising a revival of America’s past glory. However, a closer examination reveals that many of Trump’s strategies align with those traditionally attributed to the establishment or the “deep state” Or Elites of America.
This alignment becomes evident in a carefully orchestrated four-pronged approach, which includes the UK’s departure from the European Union, stringent immigration policies, economic maneuvers resulting in inflation, and the looming threat of global conflict. This writer has highlighted the USA’s agenda in his writings. Far from dismantling the establishment, Trump’s actions reflect continuity with longstanding strategic objectives of preserving U.S. dominance over the world.
Brexit: weakening European unity
The United Kingdom’s decision to leave the European Union, widely known as Brexit, represents the first prong of this approach. Trump was a vocal supporter of Brexit, viewing it as an act of reclaiming sovereignty and rejecting the influence of a supranational entity. His public endorsements and interactions with key Brexit leaders, such as Nigel Farage, underscored his ideological alignment with the movement.
Brexit, however, is more than just a question of sovereignty. It serves a larger strategic purpose. A unified Europe under the EU poses a potential rival power bloc to the United States. By supporting Britain’s exit, the Trump administration implicitly supported the weakening of collective European power. This divide-and-conquer strategy aligns with a longstanding U.S. approach to ensure that no European entity grows strong enough to challenge American dominance. By breaking away from the EU, Britain became more reliant on its “special relationship” with the U.S., solidifying Washington’s influence over London while undermining Brussels.
This tactic is hardly anti-establishment. It mirrors traditional deep-state strategies of realigning global alliances to favor American interests. In this sense, Brexit is less about sovereignty and more about tilting the balance of power to benefit the U.S., reinforcing the idea that Trump’s presidency, despite its populist veneer, adhered to conventional geopolitical goals.
Immigration policies: a controlled demographic shift
The second prong of this strategy revolves around immigration. Trump’s administration implemented some of the most stringent immigration policies in recent U.S. history. From the infamous travel bans targeting predominantly Muslim countries to the separation of families at the border, his presidency prioritized reducing the influx of immigrants. These actions, framed as protecting American jobs and ensuring national security, resonated with his base but also had broader implications.
One of the core objectives of these policies appears to be a reversal of demographic trends in the United States. By promoting the idea of “mass migration” back to immigrants’ home countries, Trump aligned himself with a philosophy that seeks to preserve a specific cultural and economic status quo. This philosophy is not new; it echoes historical efforts to control labor markets and maintain cultural homogeneity in the face of globalization.
What makes this approach striking is its alignment with establishment interests. Controlling demographic shifts has long been a strategy to address economic and social challenges, particularly in periods of political upheaval. By framing immigration as a threat and promoting policies that force immigrants out, Trump’s administration effectively reinforced traditional power structures. Far from dismantling the establishment, these actions perpetuated its goals under the guise of populist rhetoric.
Economic maneuvers: the inflationary strategy
The third prong of this strategy involves the manipulation of economic systems, particularly through policies that contribute to global inflation. Trump’s trade wars, particularly with China, are a prime example. By imposing tariffs on Chinese goods and pressuring allies to follow suit, his administration disrupted global supply chains. While these measures were framed as efforts to protect American industries, their broader impact was to increase the cost of goods and services, both domestically and internationally.
Global inflation, driven in part by these policies, serves as a tool to consolidate economic power. Inflation disproportionately affects developing nations, widening the gap between the Global North and South. For the United States, this means maintaining its position at the top of the global economic hierarchy while limiting the ability of emerging economies to challenge its dominance. This is not an anti-establishment move; it is a classic establishment strategy of economic hegemony.
Moreover, the inflationary pressures created by such policies provide justification for austerity measures and increased control over financial systems. By engineering a scenario in which global markets are destabilized, the establishment or in this case, the Trump administration acting in alignment with its goals ensures that power remains centralized within a few key economies. The impact on everyday Americans, who bear the brunt of higher prices, is framed as collateral damage in the pursuit of larger national interests.
The looming threat of global conflict
The final prong of this approach is perhaps the most consequential: the prospect of a global war. While Trump is often credited with avoiding new large-scale military conflicts during his first term, his administration’s actions laid the groundwork for increased global tensions. By withdrawing from international agreements, escalating trade wars, and taking a hardline stance against nations like Iran and North Korea, Trump’s foreign policy contributed to an atmosphere of uncertainty and mistrust.
The realignment of military alliances further underscores this point. Trump’s emphasis on strengthening NATO, despite his criticism of member contributions, and his increased military spending reflect a preparation for potential conflicts. The Quad alliance, involving the U.S., India, Japan, and Australia, emerged as a counterweight to China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific. These actions suggest a strategy of containment, which, historically, has often preceded military engagement.
The potential for a global war, whether through direct confrontation or proxy conflicts, serves a dual purpose. It consolidates power within the hands of the military-industrial complex and reasserts the United States’ role as the world’s leading superpower. Far from being a departure from the establishment, this approach aligns with its most traditional objectives.
Challenging the anti-establishment narrative
When viewed through this lens, the idea that Trump is anti-establishment begins to crumble. His actions, far from dismantling the deep state, appear to support its underlying philosophy. The four-pronged approach Brexit, immigration policies, inflationary economic measures, and the preparation for potential global conflict reflects a continuity with historical strategies designed to preserve U.S. dominance. What sets Trump apart is not his deviation from the establishment but his ability to rebrand these strategies as populist. By appealing to the frustrations of ordinary Americans and framing himself as an outsider, he has successfully sold establishment goals as revolutionary. This dualityanti-establishment rhetoric coupled with pro-establishment actions is perhaps the defining feature of Trump’s political legacy.
Conclusion
The notion that Donald Trump is an anti-establishment leader is, at best, a carefully crafted illusion. His presidency, and the strategies it employed, align closely with traditional deep-state objectives. The four-pronged approach discussed facilitating Brexit, enforcing mass migration policies, manipulating economic conditions to induce inflation, and laying the groundwork for global conflict reflects a continuation of the status quo, albeit under the guise of a populist movement. “Make America Great Again” may resonate as a call for change, but its underlying philosophy is deeply entrenched in establishment thinking. For those who seek to understand the dynamics of power in the modern world, Trump’s presidency offers a case study in how establishment strategies can be repackaged to appeal to an anti-establishment sentiment. The question remains: how long can this illusion endure before the contradictions become too glaring to ignore?
The author is the Chief Editor of Monthly Interaction.
