The Illusionist
America’s recent political choice reflects a powerful, almost desperate, desire to reject the status quo—a cry against an establishment many feel has failed them.
After years of widening inequality, stagnant wages, and policies that favor corporations over people, voters yet again embraced the candidate who promised to “drain the swamp” and disrupt entrenched powers.
Yet, in the pursuit of anti-establishment change, Americans have rallied behind a figure who, paradoxically, embodies the very corporate interests fueling the establishment they despise.
The Corporate Reality Behind Anti-Establishment Rhetoric
Former President Trump positioned himself as an outsider, a champion for the “forgotten” Americans. His rhetoric resonates with those yearning for a leader who stands apart from the power structures they feel have worked against them.
Yet, his first term reveals a pro-corporate agenda cloaked in populist language. The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, for example, slashed the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, generating record profits for corporations and substantial gains for the top 1% of earners.
Meanwhile, real wages for everyday Americans saw minimal growth, and the promised trickle-down effects simply didn’t materialize.
Americans can hardly pay grocery bills, and corporations are reporting record-breaking profits under Trumps tax reforms.
The money given back to corporations had to come from somewhere and the administration’s attempts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act and reduce funding for essential social programs—such as food assistance (SNAP) and affordable housing—left many vulnerable families and working-class individuals at greater risk, undermining support systems intended to provide basic security.
Furthermore, by rolling back protections like overtime pay eligibility and workplace safety standards, the administration weakened safeguards for countless workers. This placed middle- and low-income individuals, many of whom rely on these protections for fair wages and safe working conditions, at a disadvantage.
By promoting these pro-corporate policies as populist measures, Trump has effectively strengthened the very establishment he claims to oppose.
The result? A further concentration of wealth among the elite and an economy where corporate interests remain prioritized over public welfare—leaving middle- and low-income Americans more vulnerable than ever.
Exploiting Values and Fears as Tools of Manipulation
Adding another layer of complexity, Trump has expertly harnessed cultural fears and religious values as tools of political manipulation. By aligning himself with “Christian values” and tapping into fears surrounding immigration, gender identity, and a perceived loss of national identity, he positions himself as a defender of a traditional moral order.
Yet these values often act as a smokescreen, distracting from policies that overwhelmingly benefit corporations over individuals.
Here lies a double paradox: while Trump appeals to religious voters by espousing traditional values, his personal life reflects something entirely different. From multiple divorces and extramarital affairs to questionable business practices, his personal choices often contradict Christian teachings of humility, fidelity, and compassion.
He uses Christian values to gain trust while embodying corporate interests and failing to live up to the principles he publicly champions.
Control Over Conviction: The Political Weaponization of Values
By invoking Christian values, Trump and other conservative leaders push for laws that restrict individual freedoms and enforce restrictive worldviews.
The assertion that “our interpretation of God’s intent is true, and He knows what’s best for you” has become a political stance, justifying policies that aim to impose certain beliefs across society.
In reality, these cultural and emotional issues are often distractions from policies directly shaping our lives.
Ultimately, the appeal to values serves control more than conviction, harnessing people’s deeply held beliefs while obscuring the real impacts of pro-corporate legislation.
Using Fear to Justify Restrictions and Narrow Worldviews
This recent outcome emboldens those who claim to defend “liberation” while reinforcing existing power structures.
The Republican Party presents freedom as a battle against exaggerated (and sometimes imaginary) threats, rallying voters through fear of differing values.
For instance, legislation aimed at “protecting children” from learning about race, gender, and challenging aspects of history often censors educators, allowing the government to control what is taught in schools. This approach paves the way for Orwellian-style oversight of education, eroding critical dialogue and limiting exposure to diverse perspectives. All fine if you agree with the overseers – but how long until their opposition is in charge of that oversight?
Similarly, the surge in book bans in deep red states targets works on racial inequality, LGBTQ+ themes, or uncomfortable parts of history. These bans are often framed as “preserving innocence.” In reality, they limit open dialogue, pushing us closer to a society where thought is controlled and the government enforces specific ideologies and religious agendas. Ironically, this resembles the very control our founders left England to escape.
What’s more ironic? those who loudly object to “protect the children” arguments in areas like gun control often accept restrictions on information—so long as those restrictions align with their values.In a race to enforce their values on their neighbors – they are curtailing their own rights.
I share concerns with many of my fellow Americans that we may see increased federal control extending beyond individual states, with policies framed as “protection” that may ultimately limit personal freedoms.
These growing concerns about federal control aren’t isolated. They reflect a larger trend in American politics where divisive cultural issues are leveraged to rally support, often under the guise of protection or patriotism. This tactic, while effective, risks deepening divides and eroding the very freedoms many Americans cherish. By framing certain policies as essential for safeguarding values, leaders can justify measures that restrict individual rights and impose specific ideologies across the nation.
The Power of Divisive Campaign Tactics
The success of these divisive tactics in campaigning reveals the state of American politics.
It is heartbreaking to me that a campaign built on:
- Vilifying immigrants and refugees, including proposing travel bans on predominantly Muslim countries
- Promoting anti-LGBTQ+ policies, such as banning transgender individuals from the military
- Equating Christianity with patriotism while marginalizing other faiths, thereby undermining religious freedom
- Stirring racial tensions by defending Confederate symbols and portraying racial justice movements as threats
- Supporting authoritarian tactics and undermining democratic processes by questioning election integrity
…has gained such momentum.
Polls indicate that these divisive issues resonate deeply with certain voter demographics, creating a wellspring of support for candidates who claim to protect traditional values. Leaders on the right have learned to tap into these emotions like an oil well of votes, using them to gain power while deflecting from policies that ultimately serve corporate amd thus big government interests.
The Anti-Establishment Figure Who Reinforces the Establishment
Comparing the 2024 campaign talking points to the reality of 2016-2020; we find ourselves wondering at a striking paradox. Here is a candidate who convinces millions he stands against the establishment while his policies reinforce corporate power and a leader who claims to champion Christian values while his personal life tells a different story.
This dual disconnect reflects a broader issue in American politics—voters’ genuine frustrations and fears are leveraged not to create real change but to strengthen the very systems they seek to oppose.
For many Americans, alignment with traditional Christian values is a major motivating factor. Yet Trump’s record consistently shows a pattern of using these values rhetorically rather than embodying them personally or politically.
To be fair, he did advance a Christian nationalist agenda by enacting policies that appealed to key Christian priorities.
For example, he appointed three conservative Supreme Court justices, setting the stage for the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade, and expanded religious exemptions for healthcare providers and businesses to refuse services based on faith-based objections. His administration reinstated and expanded the “Mexico City Policy,” cutting off U.S. funds for international organizations providing abortion services, and supported “school choice” initiatives that redirected federal funds toward private, often religious, schools. These actions solidified his popularity among Christian conservatives and were framed as defenses of “religious liberty” and “Christian values.”
However, Trump’s policies often favored corporate or religious freedoms over individual rights, especially in areas like LGBTQ+ protections and healthcare access—undermining the rights of some in the name of protecting others.
Once again, this paves the way for a government deeply involved in the lives of its constituents, shaping policy based on popular interpretations of old religious texts.
Reinforcing and Expanding the Establishment
Under Trump, government power expanded in several key areas.
- By declaring a national emergency at the border, he bypassed Congress to fund the border wall, setting a precedent for executive overreach.
- His administration’s strict immigration policies, including family separation and expanded border surveillance, granted agencies like ICE and DHS greater authority with fewer checks.
- Trump also deployed federal agents to protests in cities like Portland, raising concerns about federal control over local matters and civil liberties.
- Additionally, his conservative judicial appointments strengthened law enforcement powers and endorsed broader executive authority, further solidifying government control over individual rights.
By focusing on divisive, hot-button cultural issues, Trump used his time in office to distract from policies that favor profits over people, and control over freedom.
He masterfully appealed to religious and libertarian sensibilities while advancing agendas that leave middle- and low-income Americans worse off financially and all Americans less free.
The Illusion of Anti-Establishment Change
The drive to challenge the establishment is genuine and urgent, yet if history is any indication – the chosen path has led not to a dismantling of power, but to its further consolidation in the hands of corporations and elites.
By appealing to Christian values and anti-establishment sentiments, Trump has crafted an image that resonates with voters’ hopes while advancing policies that serve a very different agenda.
This double paradox forces us to ask: Have we traded our rights in the name of religious conviction, surrendering personal freedoms under the guise of protection?
In our pursuit of change, have we been manipulated into reinforcing the very systems we sought to escape?
Final Thoughts
In the name of tradition, we may be chipping away at the principles that have historically defined America:
- respect for individual freedoms
- a pluralistic society
- a government that serves all, not just the privileged few
We risk surrendering immense power to leaders who wield faith as a tool of control. Many Christians seem willing to sacrifice our freedom to impose selective religious interpretations onto the entire nation.
Meanwhile, another significant portion of the population is willing to endorse a candidate who promises to dismantle what has taken centuries to build, yet consistently acts in the interests of his billionaire allies.
These leaders erode the very rights their supporters hold dear—all in the name of restricting others’ freedoms by enforcing a code of values not shared by half the country. This choice should give us pause.
How do we safeguard the core values of freedom, fairness, and respect for individual rights that should be the foundation of our democracy? In seeking change, have we handed over our power to leaders who exploit our values, only to empower the establishment further?
Time may reveal the true cost of this paradox, but we must ask ourselves now: What freedoms are we willing to sacrifice in the name of symbols that promise change but deliver control?