What is MAGA in the post-Trump era?
As DeSantis and the Republican establishment take up the mantle of the MAGA movement, the lost and changed messages of the 2016 populist platform must be addressed.
It is a long way to 2024 and there’s reasonable speculation that Trump will run against Biden again, but let’s assume Trump takes a back seat while rallying the base around a new candidate like Ron DeSantis. In the Biden era, with Trump banned from Twitter and in the background of politics, the Republican party is -for the most part- united but is still struggling on what it actually stands for. It is very clear what the party stands for culturally as seen with the first actions down in Florida relating to fighting “Critical Race Theory” and outcry over the handling of the ongoing border crisis. The GOP has also been clear on how it feels towards Big Tech monopolies and the emerging War on Domestic Terror. However, what has been most puzzling is the Biden-era Republican stances on economics and mixed messaging on foreign policy. In these very important policy areas, it is has become increasingly obvious that the MAGA movement is being co-opted by the Republican establishment in order to dress up the same failed ideas and corruption in populist America First rhetoric.
Economics:
In 2016, the economic policy platform caught the attention of working-class voters in the Republican party and blue-collar Democrats in the Midwest. Trump’s trade policy of ending free trade that is draining middle-income manufacturing jobs from the was wildly popular. His grand infrastructure spending plan to rejuvenate the American interior was also well-received. During Trump’s presidency, he even made support of stimulus checks a mainstream Republican position. This was a slap in the face to the failed Republican establishment of “libertarian” economists such as Paul Ryan, Larry Kudlow, and other establishment figures. But where is the discussion of that now? It is nowhere to be seen. The fight against Biden’s infrastructure proposal is that it was spending too much money and this resulted in a bipartisan $900 billion dollar bill that is essentially a typical DC-corporate privatization racket. What MAGA 2016 policy would have dictated is a grand multi-year $7 trillion dollar bill paid for by getting out of foreign endless wars.
But that is not the Republican nor Democratic party today. Instead, the America First Policy Institute (AFPI) - the MAGA think thank that has garnered millions in funding - being led by none other than Larry Kudlow. How is the same economic austerity and corporatism of the past America First? It seems that outside of international trade and stimulus checks, MAGA and American First are just brands for the Republican establishment to wield.
Foreign Policy:
Getting out of the endless wars in the Middle East was a popular talking point in the 2016 campaign and actually put Republicans in a position to be the clear anti-war party in America. However, former National Security Advisor John Bolton and UN Ambassador Niki Haley had other ideas. They managed to push Trump to the brink of war with Iran until he, correctly, decided not to push tensions further. Despite this last-minute decision by Trump, the administration laid the groundwork for an eventual war with Iran through the brutal sanctions designed to wipe out the reformist Iranian middle class. Additionally, the Republicans have not been hard on Biden for bombing Syria and continued presence in the Middle East. Nor have Republicans been skeptical of the privatization of the Afghanistan war disguised as a withdrawal. This is put in sharp contrast with Trump being firm on his disagreement with these endless wars on terror when he appeared on Hannity earlier this week.
In the case of US-China relations, MAGA has been quite consistent although at times failing to meet the moment on actual action. American First policy has forever changed the US outlook towards China to the point that even the Biden administration is fearful of being seen as weak towards them. This has been a success in many aspects but party attitudes have changed from just being hard on China economically to putting pressure on China militarily as well. This can be a dangerous game and a method for the political class to shield the continued economic exploitation of American workers from scrutiny.