Books&Ideas

Beyond Ideological Reductionism: A Pragmatist Framework for Trumpworld 2.0

Introduction: Why Old Theories Fail

The return of Donald Trump to power has unleashed a torrent of competing theories—broligarchy, End Times Fascism, Slobodian’s neoliberal genealogy—each grasping at a piece of the puzzle but missing the regime’s core dynamic. These frameworks, while illuminating, share a common flaw: they seek ideological coherence where Trumpworld 2.0 is defined by volatility, improvisation, and personalist rule. This project proposes a new, three-level approach rooted in pragmatic pluralism, offering a “good enough” framework for understanding and tracking the ever-shifting landscape of American authoritarianism.

Project Structure: Three Levels of Analysis

Meta-Framework: Pragmatic Pluralism
Drawing on Dewey and Mead, this project rejects ideological reductionism in favor of a flexible, process-oriented philosophy. Pragmatic pluralism underwrites all subsequent analysis, emphasizing empirical inquiry, cultural relativism, and adaptive theorizing in response to “ruptures in experience.”
Empirical Case Studies
The personalist model is tested against concrete cases—such as the Musk-Trump feud, the sidelining of Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society, and the rise and fall of coalition partners like Christian nationalists, tech elites, and MAHA. Each case is examined for what it reveals about coalition volatility, elite disposability, and the transactional logic of Trump’s regime.
Policy Genealogies: Authoritarian Tools and Amalgamation
Special attention is given to the genealogy of Trump’s authoritarian policies, particularly the fusion of New Antisemitism Ethos (NAS) and anti-wokeism. These bipartisan and transnational currents, weaponized under Trump 2.0, are traced through episodes like university defunding and mass deportation, showing how policy tools are adapted for personalist purposes.

Why Ideological Models Fall Short

Broligarchy posits a stable tech-elite alliance, but Musk’s public criticism of Trump and subsequent marginalization reveal the limits of oligarchic partnership under personalist rule.
End Times Fascism highlights Christian nationalist mobilization but cannot explain the displacement of CN by anti-woke and pro-Israel factions, or the emergence of new coalition players like MAHA.
Slobodian’s Neoliberal Genealogy uncovers the authoritarian potential within neoliberalism but falters when faced with Trump’s overt statism, tariffs, and coalition with post-liberal and anti-capitalist thinkers.

All these models underestimate the improvisational, transactional, and contingent nature of Trump’s coalition management.

The Personalist-Locomotive Alternative

Trump 2.0 is best understood as a personalist system:

Coalition Management: Factions board and disembark the “Trump locomotive” as expedient, wielding influence only so long as they serve the leader’s immediate interests.
Instrumental Ideology: Trump deploys “deep stories” and symbolic appointments (e.g., RFK Jr. for MAHA, Huckabee for Christian Zionists) to mobilize groups without genuine ideological commitment.
Empirical Ruptures: Feuds (Musk), policy reversals (abortion bans), and shifting alliances expose the brittleness and volatility of personalist power.

This model, grounded in pragmatic pluralism, privileges process and empirical inquiry over theoretical perfection, using real-time ruptures as opportunities for adaptive analysis.

Preview of Case Studies

Subsequent sections will apply this framework to:

The Musk-Trump feud and elite disposability (“There Is No Broligarchy”)
The genealogy of NAS/anti-woke amalgamation in university defunding and deportation policy
The shifting role of Christian nationalism and the rise of new coalition players

Implications for Resistance and Analysis

Personalism’s lack of deep institutional roots means it is both dangerous and fragile. Democratic resilience depends less on ideological counter-narratives and more on institutional defense, judicial independence, and coalition-building among threatened groups. Recognizing the primacy of personalist dynamics—not ideological coherence—offers a more realistic roadmap for both understanding and challenging Trumpworld 2.0.

Conclusion

This project moves beyond ideological reductionism, offering a pragmatic, pluralist, and empirically grounded approach to the study of Trumpism. By tracking coalition shifts, policy genealogies, and the improvisational logic of personalist rule, we aim to provide a living model—one flexible enough to adapt as Trumpworld itself evolves.

Instructions for this page:

Use this space to draft, refine, and debate the personalist/pragmatic pluralist model.
Add new case studies, genealogies, and critiques as the project develops.
Keep the focus on empirical ruptures, coalition dynamics, and methodological innovation.