It has long been leftist practice to critique the right as cold, materialistic, profit-focused, and neoliberal – rightly so. Positions such as opposition to higher corporate taxes or environmental restrictions exhibit an ideology that legendary sociologist Max Weber would have described as “rationalized,” insofar as they prioritize rational calculation in the ambition of material profit. The Left generally prefers the immaterial; it (theoretically) prioritizes people, culture, and conservation. In the Trumpian era, however, the materialist or rationalist reading of the Republican Party has lost its salience. The Trump administration is compelled by anti-materialist, anti-neoliberal, and irrationalist sentiments, within a philosophy best defined as a species of romanticism. This is a foreboding development, but it should excite those on the Left who advocate a fundamentally similar ideological movement.
Similar movements have occurred throughout history, but an especially relevant family of thought can be attributed to Frederick Nietzsche. In the late 19th century, Nietzsche adamantly critiqued the pitiful, flaccid, overly-empathetic state of humanity, instead valorizing its antithesis: his amorphous concept of an unrestrained, vital, and heroic übermensch (translated literally to “superman”). He also advocated the return of what he termed the “Dionysian Instinct” (Dionysus being the god of revelry, drunkenness, and sensual pleasure), a drive within each human towards chaos, mysticism, irrationality, and de-individualization. He claimed modernity overvalued the opposing “Apollonian Instinct,” a drive towards rationality, order, and separation, meaning the individualization of people and the categorization of things in the world.
A few decades later, Johann Plenge and Werner Sombart wrote of their abhorrence of English Liberalism, whose allegedly “commercial” tenets of peace and individualism they contrasted to the ideals of organization, war, and heroism. Sombart critiqued the “capitalist spirit,” and by the 1930s was delighted to observe a “new…German spirit,” winning over mankind. Finally, Julius Evola, personal favorite of Benito Mussolini, wrote that civilization was in “Kali Yuga,” an age of materialism and decadence, which must be overcome by a return to racist, antisemitic, illiberal, and esoteric tradition that would re-establish access to “transcendent, supersensible reality.” The through line of these thinkers is an aversion to the above-defined rationalization. Weber warned that it would result in disenchantment, wherein life feels bare, systematized, and godless, because we understand it only through cold economic logic. Nietzsche, Plenge, Sombart, and Evola aimed at re-enchantment, preaching a nebulous combination of heroism, irrationalism, collectivism, mysticism, traditionalism, and release of more base emotions. Similar ambitions were shared by the American Transcendentalist, Romantic Art, and Romantic Philosophy movements (the latter chafed with Nietzsche on some specifics but influenced him substantially). These coalitions might be gathered under a genus of “romantic” thought. The intellectual assembly following Nietzsche would therefore be an example of political romanticism, one which was dramatically popular throughout the early 20th century, right up until May of 1945.
These thinkers’ essential work in inspiring fascism has rightfully stained their legacy in the decades since, but today, the alt-right is echoing them. Internet demagogue Nick Fuentes applauded the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan, declaring, “The Taliban is a conservative, religious force, the U.S. is godless and liberal.” Ex-Ron Desantis staffer Nate Hochman claims that every Trump Junior staffer has read Bronze Age Mindset, the definitive work of online right-wing philosopher Costin Alamariu. Heavily inspired by prose and subject matter by Nietzsche, it too bemoans the decadent and weakened state of contemporary mankind, and prescribes a release of vaguely defined violent masculine vitality. Joe Rogan has proclaimed that we are currently in the Kali Yuga, and Steve Bannon has publicly alluded to his reading of Evola. History, it seems, is repeating itself.
Although Trump himself is unable to commit entirely to any ideal, this mode of thought is being materialized through many of his administration’s actions. The deportation of illegal immigrants on a massive scale, for example, hurts corporate interests and economic growth, while heightening inflation. The simultaneous increase in tariffs cuts the U.S. off from a globalized system, which brought it unparalleled prosperity. Contra the neoliberal, GDP-maximizing, and pro-globalization ideology of the pre-Trump GOP, these policies brashly injure our nation’s material wealth in an ambitious attempt to redefine the American way of life. They push for an America that values white culture over efficiency, an America with fewer office jobs and more gritty, old-fashioned, blue-collar workers. The DHS’s posts of paintings such as “American Progress” and “Morning Pledge,” and Trump’s requirement that all new federal buildings be built in the classical architectural style reflect this vision. This administration’s aspirations are certainly cruel, racist, and broadly harmful — but they are not very neoliberal, cold, or profit-motivated. They express an irrational, radical ambition for a return to an idealized past: they are romantic.
Is the foundation of that vision so foreign to the Left? When Kennedy proclaimed that “[we] choose to go the moon this decade and to do the other things, not because they are easy but because they are hard,” and when Carter advised that “material goods cannot fill the emptiness of lives which have no confidence or purpose,” were they espousing utilitarian rationalism? When thirty thousand hippies gathered in Golden Gate Park and agreed to Turn on, Tune in, and Drop out, what else were they aspiring to but a poetic alternative to stifling modern life? Can radical Communists and mild-mannered Environmentalists alike not relate to nostalgia? Many are sentimental in some way for the before-times, the times before each human being was a small function in a massive corporation, before every street in the world looked the same, and before we leveled all the mountains and replaced them with one hundred trillion dollars gross global product. Fundamentally, nobody can sympathize with a rejection of the logic of liberalism more than leftists — even Sombart and Plenge were considered influential Marxists before they decided to become influential Fascists.
For those who want to redefine life and society, those who want to meld the old and new and throw out the present, and those who care more for the human spirit than worldly gain, Trump 2.0 should be exhilarating as it is terrifying. Until now, to covet a life and culture of poetry rather than pragmatism has been taboo; even Clinton, Obama, and Biden were settled into a neoliberal ethos. But the 2024 election proves humanity is unsatisfied with liberalism; it revolted against it in the 1930s, and it is revolting against it again. Tie-dye-clad teenagers on acid are no longer the only ones interested in re-imagining the future; the popular vote wants change. But Donald Trump’s inhumane escapades are unacceptable; America must not allow him to continue merely out of dissatisfaction with the status quo he is attacking. Sombart and Plenge promoted an originally moral romanticism, but allowed it to be perverted into an ideology of evil. Will the anti-neoliberal left concede to the surging tide of the anti-neoliberal right? Orpheus only resisted the sirens by playing a song more beautiful than theirs. It is up to the Left, especially those once sidelined for their radical ambition, to redefine this revolt. They must recapture it from insidious actors on the Right, enact it morally, and avoid repeating the result of Nietzsche’s legacy.
Featured Image Source: San Francisco Chronicle