The Royalist Lens
A novel theory, termed 'neoroyalism,' is gaining traction to interpret President Donald Trump's disruptive influence on the established global order. This
perspective suggests that his decision-making, particularly in economic policy, bears a striking resemblance to the practices of 16th-century European royal families, such as the Tudors and the Hapsburgs. Instead of prioritizing national interests, competitive advantages, collective prosperity, or long-term economic growth, global economic policymaking under this neoroyalist framework is driven by personal relationships, family ties, and business connections. This departure from traditional geopolitical thinkers like Monroe or Metternich, and even Machiavelli, shifts the focus to figures like Henry VIII and Emperor Charles V. The core idea, articulated by political scientists Abraham L. Newman and Stacie Goddard, is that foreign policy becomes a vehicle for funneling financial gains and status to the president and his inner circle. This implies a willingness to collaborate with rivals to serve the immediate, self-interested objectives of this 'court,' rather than engaging in genuine competition. The resonance of this royalist analogy stems from its ability to capture Trump's imperious governing style, his often unpredictable policy shifts, and his apparent disregard for established international norms, all while exhibiting an admiration for monarchical systems.
Cronyism and Personal Gain
The neoroyalist theory shares significant commonalities with crony capitalism, a system frequently observed under authoritarian regimes like those led by Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines or Vladimir Putin in Russia. In both scenarios, economic policy is fundamentally shaped by a select group of business and political elites who leverage their positions for personal enrichment. Professor Filipe Campante of Johns Hopkins University argues that this approach is detrimental to overall economic health. He posits that policy decisions are no longer guided by market competitiveness or sound economic principles, but rather by the strength of personal connections. Consequently, the ultimate beneficiaries are not necessarily those with the most innovative ideas or promising projects, but rather those who are well-connected. This dynamic stifles economic progress, hindering productivity and broad-based prosperity. Individuals or entities outside this favored circle, or those who oppose the administration, face the threat of punitive measures. These can include exclusion from government contracts, denial of regulatory approvals, and other forms of withheld benefits. A stark example of this occurred when President Trump publicly threatened to sever government ties with Elon Musk's extensive business ventures after Musk began criticizing him, stating, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon’s Governmental Subsidies and Contracts.'
Undermining Growth and Fairness
Economic decisions driven predominantly by personal profit motives or capricious whims severely undermine sustainable growth and introduce an element of profound unfairness into the system. The very foundation of a healthy economy relies on predictable rules, fair competition, and the impartial allocation of resources. When policy becomes a tool for personal vendettas or preferential treatment, this foundational stability is eroded. Research underpinning the 2024 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences highlighted precisely this issue: the concentration of power, resources, and opportunities within a small political elite demonstrably curtails development and diminishes overall prosperity. A recent, illustrative case involves the unusual arrangement for a U.S. version of TikTok, the popular social media application developed by China's ByteDance. Initially, a law championed by both Republicans and Democrats, citing national security concerns, mandated that TikTok divest its Chinese ownership or cease operations in the U.S. However, the subsequent deal, which received administration approval, allows the platform, where Trump himself boasts over 16 million followers, to continue operating. The significant investors in this new U.S. entity include entities closely linked to the president's inner circle and business associates. Notably, Oracle, a software giant co-founded by a prominent Trump supporter, Larry Ellison; MGX, an Emirati investment firm that has engaged in dealings with the Trump family's cryptocurrency ventures; and Silver Lake, a firm that has partnered with the private equity company established by Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, are all key players. Similarly, deals permitting Nvidia to supply chips to China, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, alongside the extension of military assurances to Qatar, appear to align with this pattern of personalist economic policymaking.
Personal Whims, Global Impact
The influence of personal whims on global economic policy extends beyond complex business deals and into more direct, seemingly arbitrary interventions. Trump himself acknowledged that he escalated Switzerland's import tariff from 30% to 39% simply because its former president, Karin Keller-Sutter, 'just rubbed me the wrong way.' In another instance, he imposed a steep 50% tariff on Brazil. His justification for this action was the Brazilian government's refusal to halt the prosecution of Jair Bolsonaro, a former president and political ally of Trump's, who had been convicted of plotting a coup. Such self-interested policy decisions breed an environment of uncertainty, which is anathema to investment. The established rules governing decisions and contracts become unstable and unpredictable, making it exceptionally challenging for businesses to plan and operate effectively. Furthermore, this concentration of decision-making power within a select presidential clique renders traditional channels of diplomatic communication largely ineffective. According to Newman of Georgetown, instead of relying on established bureaucratic processes, foreign policy is increasingly managed by what amounts to a royal entourage. This personalist approach reflects a broader pattern, evident even before Trump entered the political arena, with his launch of a cologne brand named 'Empire' in 2015, coinciding with his early considerations of a presidential run. His explanation at the time was that 'every man has his own empire to build.' This ethos appears to have translated directly into policy, with Trump's financial empire and those of his close associates reportedly thriving, with his family's business interests estimated to have amassed at least $1.4 billion.
