As the November 2024 presidential election approaches, Donald Trump's promise to dismantle the 'deep state' has sparked significant concern among political analysts and commentators. Trump has vowed to fire thousands of civil servants and replace them with loyalists, a move that his running mate, JD Vance, supports. This plan includes controversial proposals, such as appointing Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to co-lead a new 'Department of Government Efficiency' aimed at reforming federal operations. Musk's role has been highlighted as emblematic of a new wave of conservatism, which seeks to align political strategies with capital interests. Kojo Koram notes that Musk's integration into Trump's circle reflects a shift towards a more tech-savvy and younger demographic, contrasting with the traditional conservative ideals defined by figures like William F. Buckley, who emphasized resisting progress. Critics argue that this threatens the very foundations of democracy and reverses over a century of progress made since the New Deal. Joseph Patrick Kelly's analysis emphasizes that the historical context of this issue includes the Gilded Age, labor struggles, and the Great Depression, highlighting the importance of a meritocratic bureaucracy over political loyalty. The number of individuals paid from the U.S. Treasury but working for private businesses and nonprofits exceeds three times the federal civilian workforce, suggesting that eliminating the federal workforce would reduce spending by less than 5%. Improper payments by federal agencies totaled an estimated $2.7 trillion from 2003 to 2023, raising questions about the effectiveness of current spending. Trump's governance approach has been criticized for lacking an understanding of government functions, as he believes it can be run like a business. Richard Murphy points out that the previous administration had experienced personnel that mitigated risks, whereas Trump's current team lacks such protections. His plan to cut the federal budget by $2 trillion raises concerns about mass unemployment and the societal implications of sacking employees. Additionally, Trump's intention to expel 11 million undocumented workers presents significant logistical challenges. This approach reflects a narrow view of governance, with potential consequences including a dysfunctional government and broader societal problems. The upcoming election not only poses a choice of leadership but also a critical juncture for the preservation of democratic values in America.
In a recent analysis, Martin Sandbu from the Financial Times highlights Trump's unpredictability in policymaking as a strategic advantage that serves his interests. This unpredictability is seen as central to autocratic leadership, with parallels drawn to figures like Putin, whose non-rational image aids his control. Sandbu notes that the government efficiency program led by Musk and Ramaswamy aims to instill fear through arbitrary firings, further complicating the political landscape. Musk and Ramaswamy plan to reduce the federal workforce by 75% and cut the number of federal agencies from 428 to 99, targeting organizations such as Planned Parenthood and NASA. The article suggests that Europe should focus on domestic investments amidst diverging central bank interest rates, reflecting the broader implications of Trump's policies on international economics. As the election nears, the interplay of unpredictability and strategic governance will be critical in shaping the future of American politics.
Zhengxu Wang from the South China Morning Post draws parallels between Musk and Ramaswamy's ambitions and the radical reforms implemented by Deng Xiaoping and Zhu Rongji in China. Both sets of leaders aim to overhaul their respective governments by streamlining bureaucracy and reducing government size. Historical reformers in China, such as Shang Yang, Wang Anshi, and Zhang Juzheng, laid the groundwork for significant changes. Deng's reforms in the 1980s opened markets and downsized government, while Zhu's reforms from 1993 to 2002 cut central agencies from 86 to 59 and reduced government payroll by 20%. Zhu's second round of reforms eliminated 15 ministries and 1.15 million positions, resulting in millions being laid off as state-owned enterprises were privatized. These historical lessons may provide insights for Musk and Ramaswamy as they navigate their ambitious plans for reform in the U.S. [41d12e02][4f0016ea][e67d74a5][c6e57924][2c45663a][b1160fba][c9b1dbb7][2739e0da][cebee45c][d040f8ea]