Trump 2.0: the rise to power of an "anti-elite" elite
Donald Trump brings with him a new cohort of political figures. While one of his campaign promises was to overthrow the "corrupt elites" he accuses of flooding the American political arena, his second term has propelled to the forefront of the country elites chosen, above all else, for their loyalty to him.
William Genieys, Sciences Po and Mohammad-Saïd Darviche, University of Montpellier
Does Donald Trump's new presidency herald the rise to power of "the people and the end of corrupt elites, " as he claimed during his election campaign? Contrary to this populist rhetoric, the president-elect is in fact bringing an "anti-elite" elite to power .
While Trump's extravagant statements on Canada and Greenland, or those of Elon Musk in support of European far-right parties, dominate the media spotlight, they obscure the ambitious program of federal government transformation that the new political elite, which will come to power after Trump's inauguration, wishes to implement.
Indeed, following the ceremony on January 20, 2025, the faction of Republican elites most loyal to the MAGA ("Make America Great Again") leader, who share a common and strong hatred of Democratic elites and their policies, will monopolize executive (the administration), judicial (the Supreme Court, among others), and legislative (at least until the next midterms, the midterm elections to Congress, which will take place in 2026) powers.
However, the political project of the Trump camp is less about challenging elitism in general than about challenging a specific vision of the elite that is unique to liberal democracies.
Rhetoric condemning "democratic elitism"
Typical anti-elite political propaganda ("I speak for you, the people, against the elites who betray and deceive you, etc.") claims that populist leaders are able to exercise power for and on behalf of the people without the mediation of an elite that is disconnected from the needs of the people.
The neo-elitism theorist John Higley sees behind this form of anti-elite discourse an association between so-called "forceful leaders" and "leonine elites" (who take advantage of the former and their political success). This phenomenon jeopardizes the future of Western democracies.
Since World War II, there has been a consensus in American politics on the idea of democratic elitism. According to this principle, elite mediation is inevitable in mass democracies and must be based on two criteria: respect for election results (which must be free and competitive), on the one hand, and the relative autonomy of political institutions, on the other.
However, this consensus has been increasingly challenged since the 1990s, with the growing polarization of US politics, and has gained new momentum since the 2016 presidential campaign, marked by anti-elite rhetoric used by populist Republican leaders as well as Democrats (Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren). At the heart of their diatribes is an aversion to the establishment (the powers that be) on the East Coast of the United States, where many prestigious financial, political, and academic institutions are located, as well as the conspiracy theory notion of the deep state.
The re-election of Trump, who has never acknowledged his defeat in the 2020 presidential election, growing political hostility, and the direct involvement of high-tech moguls in political communication—especially on the Republican side—further reinforce the rejection of democratic elitism.
Trump's "top-down" populism: a revolt of the elites
The idea that democracy could be betrayed by "the revolt of the elites, " put forward by American historian Christopher Lasch (1932-1994), is not new. For anthropologist Arjun Appadurai, it characterizes contemporary populism in particular, which comes from "above." Indeed, if the20thcentury was the era of "the revolt of the masses," the21stcentury would be that of "the revolt of the elites." This would explain the rise of populist autocracies (Orban in Hungary, Erdogan in Turkey, Bolsonaro in Brazil, Modi in India, etc.) but also the victory of populist leaders in established democracies (Trump in the United States, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, for example).
As Appadurai explains, the success of Trumpian populism, which champions a revolt by ordinary Americans against the elites, obscures the fact that, following his victory in the last presidential election, "it was a new elite that ousted the Democratic elite it despises, which had occupied the White House for nearly four years ."
The goal of this "other elite" is to replace the "regular" Democratic elites as well as moderate Republicans by deeply discrediting their values (liberalism, "wokeness," etc.) and their supposedly corrupt political practices. As a result, this "top-down" populism promoted by the president-elect's supporters constitutes an alternative elite configuration, whose consequences for the transformation of American democratic life could be more significant than those observed during Trump's first term.
To paraphrase American political commentator James Carville's famous phrase, "It's the economy, stupid!", we could say today, "It's the elite, stupid!"
Moving beyond the idea of a "Muskoligarchy"
The idea that we are witnessing the formation of a "Muskoligarchy"—that is, an economic elite (including tech barons such as Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Marc Andreessen, etc.) rallied behind the figurehead of Elon Musk, appointed in November 2024 as czar of government efficiency – is appealing.
It perfectly combines the vision of an alliance between a "conspiratorial, coherent, conscious" ruling class and an oligarchy made up of the"ultra-rich." For renowned Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf, this could even be a sign of the development of "pluto-populism." https://www.youtube.com/embed/BN_82NLmqm4?wmode=transparent&start=0
Other observers, however, are cautious about the advent of this "Muskoligarchy." They point to the sociological eclecticism of the new Trumpian elite, whose outward unity is mainly due to their political loyalty, which has so far been unwavering, to the "MAGA" leader.
The fact remains that the various factions of this new "anti-elite" elite are converging around a common agenda: ridding the federal government of the supposed influence of Democratic "insiders."
The desire to get rid of the "deep state"
In his inaugural address in 1981, Ronald Reagan already stated:
"The government is not the solution to our problem; the government is the problem."
The anti-elitism of the Trumpian elite is inspired by this diagnosis and advocates a simple political agenda: ridding democracy of the "deep state."
Although we know that the idea that the American Republic is under siege by a " government of insiders " that subverts the public interest is unfounded, it is nonetheless prevalent within the new Trump administration.
This conspiracy theory is taken to its extreme by Kash Patel, a candidate tipped to head the FBI. In his book, a veritable manifesto against the federal administration, which he describes as a "gangster government," the former lawyer discusses the need to resort to "purges" in order to prosecute Democratic elites in court. He lists some 60 prominent figures, including Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris.
The appointment of Russell Vought, known for seeking to obstruct the Biden administration's transition to power in 2021, as head ofthe Office of Management and Budget (a key body within the presidential cabinet) also highlights the authoritarian shift that the Trump administration is likely to take.
Remodeling the State by affirming political loyalty to the executive branch
In order to implement their plan to "deconstruct" the American state, the "anti-elite" elites are relying on Project 2025, a program of more than 900 pages, co-signed by more than 400 experts. According to Paul Dans, director of the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, which published this text, never before has such a large group of people developed a program of such political ambition. Its goal: to impose loyalty to Project 2025 on the administrative staff of each of Washington's ministerial departments.
However, the idea is not new. At the end of his first term, Trump had decreed the Schedule F appointment , making it easier to dismiss federal civil servants inpolicy-related positions who were considered "disloyal." This decree was overturned by President Biden, but Trump's return could reverse the trend once again, thanks in particular to the discretionary power he will be able to exercise as president to award senior positions within the federal administration to his supporters (the famous spoils system).
The stated goal of this "populism" of the anti-elite elites is therefore no longer to reduce the size of the state, as was the case during the era of Reagan's "neoliberalism," but rather to dismantle the state in favor of presidential power that could potentially become arbitrary. On January 20, 2025, Trump's swearing-in ceremony will pave the way for an openly biased democracy in which the ruling elites will be able to act solely on the basis of their perception of the interests and desires of the head of state, without concern for justice and truth.
William Genieys, CNRS Research Director at CEE, Sciences Po and Mohammad-Saïd Darviche, Senior Lecturer, University of Montpellier
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Readthe original article.