Trump’s unlikely torchbearer | OC Comment

When discussing the legacy of Donald J. Trump, many would contend that there exists no such thing at all. With his bizarre handling of the post-election period, which culminated in the storming of the Capitol and the banning of his personal Twitter account, Trumpism seems to have gone out the same way it came in: bombastic, self-defeating, and most definitely out of the ordinary. 

Yet this is a merely surface-level analysis. The substantive policy changes Trump made in the 4 years he held office will remain. Many of these new policy initiatives have been taken up by Biden; some have even been reinforced and expanded upon. This curious dynamic, where the successor is elected on the virtue of simply not being the incumbent yet continues many of the same policies, provides a lesson for social conservatives seeking to take office. Instead of seeing the election as a simple pass/fail test, it is worth gauging social conservatism’s effect upon the whole body politic rather than through the simple lens of one party’s electoral success. By looking at the 2020 elections in this light, we can see that perhaps it is Trump that will have the last laugh. 

Immigration

We can first look at the issue most associated with Trump and his supporters: immigration. It is probable that every person in the Western world has heard the infamous chant of “build that wall” or Trump’s description of Mexicans as “rapists” and “drug dealers”. The Democratic candidates fell over themselves trying to court the Latino-American vote, with efforts ranging from promises to relax immigration restrictions to speaking Spanish during the televised debates. However, Biden’s administration, instead of taking the seemingly easy win in reversing Trumpian reforms, has taken a far more cautious approach to the hot-button issue. 

Though many policies have been implemented, such as a return to hearings on US soil, many other Trump-era policies remain in place. After 100 days in office, the “southern border remains effectively closed to new asylum seekers”. The White House Press Secretary announced in February that most migrants will continue to be expelled from the southern border. Biden has, in a rather timid fashion, instructed the Secretary of Homeland Security to “consider whether to modify, revoke, or rescind” the Designating Aliens for Expedited Removal procedures announced in 2019. 

Foreign Policy

It is a similar story in foreign policy. Biden has brought a different personal approach to American international relations, that is for sure, but the trend in this policy area is that Biden is adding to or modifying the previous administration’s stances rather than replacing them. The only clearly adversarial move is on climate change; rather unsurprising, given the radically different domestic constituencies of the two presidents. On other issues, such as China and NATO, the disagreement between Biden and Trump seems to be more on the approach rather than the ultimate objectives. 

With regards to China, Biden has achieved “essential continuity” with the Trump administration’s policy. Continuing with the cold-war-esque dynamic, Biden continues to marshal US allies both in Europe and Asia while continuing the US pivot to the Indo-pacific. It is no surprise that Toshihiro Nakayama from Keio university describes this approach as adding “smartness to Trumpian toughness”. The wording is key; instead of reversing or replacing Trump’s policy direction, Biden is bringing his experience and tactfulness to bear on essential Trump-era objectives. 

Similarly, Biden has avoided rocking the boat in the Middle East and Russia. He has also doubled down on the quintessentially Trumpian promise to “bring the boys home” by committing to a full US withdrawal from Afghanistan by September 11th, 2021. Bringing the US’s longest war to an end has been criticized by many in the foreign policy intelligentsia, in a way that can certainly be likened to Trump’s endless excoriation at the hands of state officials and ex-government figures. 

Trade

Finally, we come to the heart of the Trumpian movement: trade. From rhetoric on US-China trade surpluses to tariff wars with allies and opponents alike, trade has been one of Trump’s most signature issues. Biden, with his political career giving him a completely different ideological heritage, seems like the most unlikely candidate to continue Trump’s protectionist opposition to free trade. However, once again it seems that Biden will continue to pursue Trump-era objectives in a distinctly non-Trumpian manner. 

Biden’s nominee for US trade representative has described tariffs as a “legitimate tool” to counter unfair Chinese trade practices. Biden has signed an executive order to reinforce Buy American provisions on US companies and plans to ensure any waivers to these requirements are made public so other companies can challenge them with thie brown US-sourced products. Biden has also held off on ending tariffs on the EU instituted by his predecessor and similarly has no immediate plans to lift tariffs on China. Whether these policy stances are due to an unlikely ideological reversal in the 46th president’s stance on trade or due to the far more likely reason of political expediency is of little importance; what does matter is that Trump’s policies have endured the transition and may now be considered a part of his legacy. 

Conclusion

We can see that for all the talk and bluster, Biden has stuck close to Trump’s policies in several key areas, even if representing a clear break on issues such as abortion. It might be apt to consider Trump a sort of unwanted prophet, who is denounced and criticized for telling the truth, in his own abrasive way,  about the US’s current needs, but whose advice is tacitly accepted by many after the fact. As described by Jonathan Tepperman “Biden may have won the election, but we’re all living in Trump’s America now”. 

What lessons can social conservatives learn from this? Firstly, it teaches us that lasting change does not need to be visible. Trump achieved a lasting one by instituting policies that are considered adminsitrative minutiae than with his signature flashy policies of building a wall or the so-called “Muslim ban”. Secondly. it tells us that election results are not the be-all and end-all of politics. Losing an election can be a victory if it forces changes in the political landscape, as was seen in Denmark. In an electoral defeat, social conservatives can shift the so-called Overton window away from the progressive hellscape and return to more policies more ideologically homogenous with our goal. After all, why should we fear the defeat of our ideas in space if they are victorious in time?

If you liked this article and want to help our organisation expand, please consider donating.