Trump’s Revolution movement, like all revolutions, has both external resistance and internal tensions. Trump may be able to forge a long-lasting domestic political alliance with policies that differ greatly from the liberal hegemony that prevailed in America and the world after the war if he can effectively negotiate these obstacles.
Examining the home roots of the expansive policy agenda that Donald Trump outlined in his inaugural address and his subsequent actions is essential as the world considers the effects of US policies during his second term as president. The US is experiencing a revolution that aims to drastically alter post-war America, not just a change of government.
It’s a “revolution of common sense,” according to Trump. In the social, political, economic, and geopolitical realms, liberals may refer to it as a “counter-revolution.” On the other hand, conservatives may view it as a “counter-counter-revolution” that aims to prevent the so-called deep state from undermining Trump’s transformative program from his first term (2017–2021).
In the 21st century, the American uprising against the liberal order has been simmering for a while. Trump, an outsider, defeated well-established political dynasties like the Democratic Clintons and Republican Bushes to win the White House in the 2016 elections thanks to this growing dissatisfaction.
Trump was the target of a relentless campaign by the liberal media and establishment, which called him a “Russian agent” and worked to sabotage his presidency at every opportunity. Trump lost the presidency in 2020 as a result of his inexperience and numerous mistakes. Nevertheless, the establishment persisted in its attack, use all of the state’s authority to remove Trump from office throughout Joe Biden’s administration.
The liberal establishment’s anti-Trump politics were decisively rejected in the 2024 elections. Trump’s fans saw the campaign as a political witch hunt that went beyond the law to punish him, while the establishment called him a “felon.” A large and profound rift in American culture is reflected in this circumstance.
Trump’s assertion that “God saved him” from an attempted assassination on July 13, 2024, “for a purpose”—to refocus American politics both domestically and internationally—may be forgiven by benevolent people. Many of his supporters were prepared to give Trump another chance to carry out his revolution because they think this was a miracle.
Trump is undoubtedly their “chosen one” to take on the establishment. Trump is gaining prominence in a significant endeavor to fundamentally transform America’s social, political, and economic structures, regardless of the issue of “divine influence.”
The Capitol, the scene of the demonstrations against Biden’s election on January 6, 2021, is a natural location for Trump’s inauguration. Trump and his supporters saw the protesters as “hostages” of the establishment, while the establishment called them a “insurgency.” Trump’s decision to pardon the roughly 1,500 protestors who were still in jail was one of his first moves. In the closing days of his presidency, Biden pardoned his own family members, while Trump saved his “political family.” The disparity has been acknowledged.
With major ramifications for the international system centered on Washington as the dominant power, Trump’s revolution calls into question four fundamental tenets of long-standing liberal hegemony in America. First, there has been criticism of the liberal ideology in forcing its “superior values” on society, which include gender identity, acceptable speech, education, and the relationship between people and God.
Trump has pledged to repeal diversity laws, reinstate free speech, reintroduce traditional values into public life, and reverse gender-identity politics. Trump, in contrast to Biden, does not attempt to advance human rights internationally or divide the globe into “democracies” and “autocracies.“
Second, there is strong political hostility to the liberal idea that borders don’t matter and that all immigrants should be welcomed in America. Trump’s emphasis on retaking US borders and expelling illegal immigrants highlights US territorial sovereignty, a concept that liberals have historically rejected. Under his leadership, sovereignty—a topic that is highly valued outside of the West—may once again be a major topic in international politics.
Third, the American political elite no longer supports the liberal notion that America can continue to absorb exports from around the world. The essential steps to rebalance US trade with the rest of the world are at the center of the present debate. The World Trade Organization, the focal point of the global trade framework established at the turn of the millennium, is opposed by both Democrats and Republicans.
Trump reiterated his willingness to employ tariffs to accomplish a number of political and economic objectives, even though he made no mention of specific tariffs in his inaugural address or early executive actions. With possible moves against particular nations imminent, the Trump administration has begun an internal study of tariff plans. In contrast to free trade and non-reciprocal commerce, “fair trade” and “reciprocity” will become more and more central in the discussion of American policy.
Fourth, liberal internationalists in Washington have maintained that Americans must “bear any burden and pay any price” in order to maintain US leadership in the world since World War II. Trump has capitalized on a movement that fiercely opposes “globalists” and demands that US interests take precedence above international disputes and the alleged demands of US leadership.
Trump has criticized America’s never-ending conflicts and emphasized the importance of having positive relations with other nations, including China and Russia, both during and after his first term. His desire to be a “peacemaker” may indicate a reluctance to engage in war with China or Russia in order to protect a “liberal international order,” even though he did not go into detail about foreign policy in his inauguration address. The outcome of this will have a significant impact on the Indo-Pacific and Eurasian geopolitics as well as the world order.
Members of Trump’s cabinet hold a range of opinions regarding America’s foreign policy, from those who want a more assertive approach to others who call for prudence. How Trump handles these internal disputes over topics like North Korea, Taiwan, Gaza, and Ukraine is still up in the air. However, it is clear that Trump is implementing a very different foreign policy strategy, one that is assertive on fundamental interests, which may diminish, while reaching agreements on other issues.
Trump’s movement, like all revolutions, has inconsistencies within itself and faces resistance from the outside. Trump may be able to forge a long-lasting domestic political alliance with policies that greatly depart from the liberal predominance of the post-war era if he can effectively manage these conflicting demands inside his movement and quell the animosity of his rivals.