The Second Trump Administration: a possible MAGA Divide?

The Second Trump Administration: a possible MAGA Divide?

An analysis by Kat Ulrike

Introduction: The Post-2024 Ideological Crisis of MAGA

The re-election of Donald Trump in 2024 marked a critical juncture in the evolution of the MAGA movement. While his first term (2017–2021) blended populist rhetoric with traditional Republican policymaking, his second term (2025–2029) exposed deep ideological rifts within his political coalition.

Hypothetically, there are two competing tendencies emerged within the MAGA movement:

1. Neo-Hardingism – A brand of economic nationalism that emphasized industrial revival, protectionist trade policies, and isolationism, yet often favored corporate interests over working-class concerns.

2. Neo-Reaganism – A fusion of MAGA’s cultural populism with corporate conservatism, maintaining Reagan-era economic principles such as tax cuts, deregulation, and a strong interventionist foreign policy.

However, rather than resolving these tensions, Trump’s second administration saw a decisive shift away from economic reform and toward cultural battles. This transition transformed MAGA into a movement more concerned with combating “wokeness” than with restructuring the economy, effectively turning it into a form of right-wing identity politics. The result was a reactionary force rather than a coherent governing ideology.

The Rise of Neo-Hardingism in Trump’s Second Term

During the 2024 campaign, Trump’s promise to “Rebuild American Greatness” centered on economic nationalism. This stance was a direct response to the economic instability of the early 2020s, including inflation, supply chain disruptions, and persistent deindustrialization.

Consider, for instance, these remarks of Harding in 1918 and the obvious parallels with Trump’s message today- that situates him resolutely in the tradition of American nationalist protectionism: “The theory of banished barriers is beautiful, the practice is destroying. American labor will never consent. We must have protection to hold us to what we are, and send us to greater eminence.”

A. Policies and Approach

Neo-Hardingism reflected the influence of the early 20th-century policies of President Warren G. Harding, who advocated for high tariffs, economic protectionism, and an America-first approach to industrial growth. In Trump’s second term, this ideology took form through several key policies:

• Increased Tariffs & Trade Wars – The administration expanded tariffs on Chinese goods, targeting industries such as technology, automobiles, and pharmaceuticals. While intended to bolster domestic industry, these measures led to retaliatory tariffs that increased consumer prices.

• Revival of the American Industrial Sector – Trump’s government introduced new tax incentives and subsidies to encourage domestic manufacturing. However, many of these policies disproportionately benefited large corporations rather than small businesses or workers.

• Reduced Immigration for Labor Protection – The administration implemented restrictive immigration policies under the pretext of protecting American jobs. While these measures appealed to the working-class base, they also led to labor shortages in key industries, particularly in agriculture and service sectors.

Through a Neo-Hardingite lens, Trump’s rise is also routinely viewed as a backlash against the globalisation of the current economic order. He will oversee a regime committed to an active policy of de facto de-globalisation, even including a renegotiating of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on ‘America First’ terms. 

B. Key Figures in the Neo-Hardingite Faction

Several prominent figures within Trump’s inner circle championed this economic nationalist agenda:

• Peter Navarro (Economic Advisor) – Navarro remained one of the most vocal advocates for protectionist policies and a more aggressive stance against China.

• J.D. Vance (Senator and Political Ally) – Vance supported economic nationalism while simultaneously critiquing Wall Street’s role in economic inequality.

• Josh Hawley (Senator and Conservative Firebrand) – Although an advocate for trade protectionism, Hawley also increasingly aligned with cultural conservatism, diluting his economic focus.

Despite these efforts, Neo-Hardingism ultimately failed to challenge corporate monopolies. Instead, it functioned more as a pro-corporate industrial policy rather than a worker-centered economic revival.

The Resurgence of Neo-Reaganism: Corporate Power Under a Populist Mask

While the Neo-Hardingites pushed for economic nationalism, another faction within Trump’s administration sought to maintain the economic orthodoxy of free-market fundamentalism. This faction, labeled Neo-Reaganism, blended Trump’s populist rhetoric with corporate-friendly policies that aligned with the traditional Republican establishment.

           A. The Economic and Foreign Policy Approach

The Neo-Reaganite approach prioritized policies that benefited corporate interests while using cultural populism to maintain support from the MAGA base:

• Tax Cuts for Businesses – The administration’s second-term tax policies mirrored Reagan-era supply-side economics, disproportionately benefiting corporations and high-income earners over workers.

• Global Military Engagements Under Economic Justifications – While Trump’s first term included isolationist tendencies, his second term saw a shift toward military interventions framed as protecting American economic interests.

• Deregulation for Big Business – Environmental, labor, and financial regulations were rolled back under the banner of “freeing the economy,” further solidifying corporate power.

B. Key Figures in the Neo-Reaganite Faction 

This faction included established conservative figures who sought to maintain a pro-business agenda:

• Larry Kudlow (Economic Advisor) – A champion of corporate tax cuts and Wall Street-friendly policies.

• Nikki Haley (Secretary of State) – Advocated for strong U.S. global involvement under the guise of economic security.

• Mike Pence (Traditional Conservative Figurehead) – Maintained a corporate-friendly economic stance while aligning with MAGA’s cultural populism.

By co-opting MAGA’s populist energy, the Neo-Reaganites effectively preserved the same corporate economic structures that Trump initially campaigned against.

The Turn Toward Cultural Politics: MAGA Becomes Right-Wing Woke

By the midpoint of Trump’s second term, economic issues had been eclipsed by cultural battles. This shift marked the transformation of MAGA into a movement more focused on symbolic victories against “wokeness” rather than substantive economic change.

A. The Prioritization of Cultural Wars

Instead of addressing structural economic challenges, the MAGA movement became fixated on cultural grievances, including:

• Eliminating DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs – State and federal efforts sought to remove DEI initiatives from corporations and universities.

• Battles against “woke” corporations – High-profile boycotts and legal challenges targeted companies perceived as too progressive.

• State-level education reforms – Laws restricting progressive education policies emphasized nationalism and patriotism in school curricula.

            B. The Rise of Right-Wing Wokeism

MAGA’s cultural turn mirrored the left’s identity politics, prioritizing symbolic victories over material change:

• Social media culture wars – MAGA figures spent increasing amounts of time engaging in online battles with progressive activists.

• Legislation targeting cultural issues rather than economic concerns – Many new laws focused on banning progressive policies rather than addressing systemic economic problems.

• Outrage politics as a mobilization tool – MAGA leaders used perpetual grievance narratives to maintain political momentum.

C. Key Figures in the Cultural Pivot

• Tucker Carlson (Media Firebrand) – Repositioned MAGA as a cultural, anti-elitist movement rather than an economic one.

• Ron DeSantis (Governor & Conservative Hardliner) – Led efforts to push back against “woke” corporations and progressive education policies.

• Elon Musk (Tech Billionaire & MAGA Ally) – Used his platform to challenge left-wing progressivism while benefiting from MAGA’s deregulation policies.

Conclusion: MAGA at a Crossroads?

By the end of Trump’s second term, the MAGA movement had fractured into competing factions with distinct priorities:

• Neo-Hardingism failed to produce meaningful worker-focused reforms, despite its economic nationalist rhetoric.

• Neo-Reaganism successfully co-opted MAGA’s populist energy to sustain corporate economic power.

• Cultural politics overtook economic grievances, transforming MAGA into a reactionary movement centered on identity politics.

Without a coherent economic direction, MAGA risks becoming a purely symbolic movement—one that is loud in rhetoric but ineffective in governance. The key question for the future of the American right remains:

Will MAGA return to its economic nationalist roots, or will it remain a cultural reactionary force, fighting symbolic battles while leaving economic power structures untouched?