How Trump’s Return Signals Global Escalation, Economic Upheaval, and Ideological Transformation

Troy Keith Preston

Nov 30, 2024

As Donald Trump prepares to re-enter the Oval Office for his second term, the contours of what his administration might bring to U.S. domestic and foreign policy are becoming clearer. Based on his stated positions, cabinet appointments, and the shifting dynamics of global geopolitics, it appears that this second presidency may exacerbate existing crises while introducing new ones. The framework for “Trumpism 2.0” combines aggressive foreign policy, economic strategies favoring elites, and an ideological shift that intensifies political correctness under a new guise. The implications of these developments involve their potential to plunge both the United States and the world into greater instability.

An “Israel First” Regime: A Hawkish Agenda

One of the clearest indicators of Trump’s foreign policy trajectory is his alignment with Israel’s hardline agenda, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Likud Party. The prospect of a Trump administration prioritizing Israel’s security and regional dominance is not new, but the geopolitical stakes have risen significantly since his first term. At the forefront of this agenda is the escalating confrontation with Iran.

Iran and the Likudnik Agenda

Iran’s recent announcement of expanding uranium enrichment with 6,000 new centrifuges has heightened tensions, particularly as Tehran edges closer to nuclear capability. Netanyahu and his allies view Iran’s potential nuclear armament as an existential threat, and they are determined to neutralize this danger through any means necessary. For Israel, this includes regime change in Iran, which necessitates dismantling Tehran’s network of regional allies—namely Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and the broader “Axis of Resistance.”

Trump’s track record suggests a strong likelihood of cooperation with this vision. His withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) during his first term was a clear indication of his administration’s alignment with Israel’s hawkish stance. The Likudnik strategy prioritizes unilateral action, including military strikes, over multilateral diplomacy to contain Iran.

The Risk of Regional Escalation

The consequences of such a strategy are profound. A direct conflict with Iran would destabilize the Middle East, affecting global oil supplies and likely triggering a humanitarian crisis. Syria remains a critical battleground in this scenario. The ongoing effort by the U.S., Israel, and Turkey to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad reflects a desire to weaken Iran’s influence in the region. However, if Assad falls, Syria risks descending into sectarian and ethnic chaos akin to post-Saddam Iraq. Such a scenario would further destabilize the region and generate millions of refugees, exacerbating tensions in Europe and straining its social and political systems.

Hawks Prevail on Russia and Ukraine

Another significant area of concern is the Trump administration’s approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Despite Trump’s campaign promises to end the war swiftly, the reality of his foreign policy apparatus suggests a different trajectory. The military-industrial complex, bolstered by bipartisan support in Washington, appears poised to dominate the administration’s decision-making on this issue.

Escalation Over Resolution

Under President Biden, the provision of long-range ATACMS missiles to Ukraine marked a significant escalation in the conflict. These weapons, capable of striking deep into Russian territory, have already been deployed in attacks on Russian military facilities. Such actions not only heighten the risk of a broader war but also underscore the lack of a coherent strategy for de-escalation. The consensus among foreign policy elites appears to favor flooding Ukraine with weapons to force Russia’s hand or escalate the war for its own sake.

Trump’s rhetoric suggests a potential shift toward negotiation with Russia, but his administration’s deep ties to defense contractors and hawkish advisors cast doubt on this possibility. Figures like Sebastian Gorka, who have expressed support for continued escalation, exemplify the influence of the military-industrial complex within Trump’s inner circle. If this faction prevails, the U.S. is likely to remain entangled in the conflict, prolonging a war that has already claimed thousands of lives and destabilized Europe.

Trumponomics: Reverse Class Warfare

On the economic front, Trump’s policies are set to prioritize the international strength of the U.S. dollar, a strategy that benefits a select group of elite interests while imposing significant costs on the broader population. Trumponomics, as outlined in his proposals, reflects a continuation of neoliberal principles but with an added emphasis on bolstering U.S. financial dominance.

Winners Under Trumponomics

The primary beneficiaries of Trump’s economic policies include:

• Bondholders and Investors: A strong dollar increases the value of U.S. assets, attracting foreign investment and benefiting domestic bondholders.
• Multinational Corporations: Companies with extensive global supply chains gain from a strong dollar, as it reduces the cost of importing goods and services.
• Oil-Producing Allies: Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, key allies of Trump, benefit from dollar-denominated oil pricing, which strengthens their purchasing power.
• U.S. Expats: Americans living abroad benefit from increased purchasing power when the dollar is strong relative to foreign currencies.

Costs to the General Public

While elites reap the rewards, the domestic consequences of Trumponomics are less favorable. A strong dollar makes U.S. exports less competitive, potentially harming manufacturing and agricultural sectors. Additionally, policies that favor credit expansion and deficit financing to maintain the dollar’s strength risk fueling inflation and raising consumer costs. These inflationary pressures, coupled with reduced consumption, could precipitate a recession, further widening the gap between elites and ordinary Americans. In essence, Trumponomics amounts to reverse class warfare, redistributing wealth upward while eroding the economic security of the middle and working classes.

Trumpism: Intensified Political Correctness Under “Anti-Anti-Semitism”

Contrary to the belief that Trumpism represents a victory over “wokeness” or political correctness, it is better understood as a transformation of these ideologies under a new guise. The ideological shift from “totalitarian humanism” to “hard Zionism” represents an intensification of political correctness, now framed as “anti-anti-Semitism.”

The Role of the “Slop Right”

The rise of what Academic Agent calls the “Slop Right” plays a crucial role in this transformation. The “Slop Right” refers to a media ecosystem that prioritizes emotional engagement and outrage over substantive analysis. Figures like Libs of TikTok, Bari Weiss, and cultural conservatives within the Zionist establishment exemplify this trend. By weaponizing anti-woke sentiment, the “Slop Right” redirects criticism of political correctness into support for hardline Zionist narratives.

This ideological shift is not a retreat from identity politics but an adaptation of it. Under the banner of “anti-anti-Semitism,” dissenting voices—particularly those critical of Israel or supportive of Palestine—are marginalized, and public discourse is increasingly policed. This reconfiguration of political correctness serves to consolidate the ruling class’s ideological control while masking its authoritarian tendencies.

Implications for Free Speech and Dissent

The new ideological framework has significant implications for free speech and political dissent. The pro-Palestine solidarity movement has exposed fractures within the “woke” narrative, prompting the Zionist elite to co-opt and weaponize anti-woke rhetoric. This process stifles genuine critique and reinforces the hegemony of the ruling class, leaving little room for alternative perspectives.

Geopolitical Fallout: A Fragmented Middle East

The Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities risk exacerbating instability in the Middle East. Syria remains a focal point of this strategy, with efforts to dismantle Assad’s regime aligning with broader goals of weakening Iran and its allies.

The Balkanization of Syria

If Assad falls, Syria faces the prospect of fragmentation along sectarian and ethnic lines. This outcome would mirror the fates of Iraq and Lebanon, both of which have struggled with internal divisions and external interference. The resulting power vacuum would likely be filled by competing factions, including Islamist insurgents and regional powers like Turkey, further destabilizing the region.

Turkey’s Expansionist Ambitions

Turkey’s neo-Ottoman aspirations add another layer of complexity. Ankara’s support for Islamist groups and its desire to dismantle Kurdish enclaves pose significant challenges to regional stability. Turkey’s ambitions extend beyond Syria to Iran and the Caucasus, potentially bringing it into conflict with Russia and Iran. These dynamics underscore the fragility of the Middle East and the risks associated with unilateral interventions.

Impact on Europe

The fallout from Middle Eastern conflicts will not be contained within the region. A renewed wave of refugees into Europe would strain social services, exacerbate political tensions, and fuel the rise of far-right movements. This dynamic could lead to the collapse of several European governments, further destabilizing the global order.

Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire

The second Trump administration is shaping up to be a volatile mix of aggressive foreign policy, elite-driven economic strategies, and ideological reorientation. Its alignment with Israel’s hardline agenda risks plunging the Middle East into deeper chaos, while its hawkish stance on Russia and Ukraine threatens to prolong a devastating conflict. Domestically, Trumponomics prioritizes the interests of elites at the expense of ordinary Americans, exacerbating inequality and economic insecurity.

Far from delivering on promises of peace and prosperity, Trumpism 2.0 appears poised to intensify the very issues it claims to address. The ideological shift from “wokeness” to “hard Zionism” underlines the persistence of political correctness, now weaponized to suppress dissent and reinforce the ruling class’s dominance. In this new era, Americans and the global community face the prospect of moving not toward resolution but deeper into the fires of instability and control.