Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The American Schism in 2025: The New Cultural Revolution

Part Six of The American Schism in 2025

The American Schism in 2025: The New Cultural Revolution

A street vendor selling public domain Donald Trump paraphernalia and souvenirs. The souvenirs are located right across the street from the White House and taken on the afternoon of July 21, 2019 near Pennslyvania Avenue in Washington, D.C.

Getty Images, P_Wei

A common point of bewilderment today among many of Trump’s “establishment” critics is the all too tepid response to Trump’s increasingly brazen shattering of democratic norms. True, he started this during his first term, but in his second, Trump seems to relish the weaponization of his presidency to go after his enemies and to brandish his corrupt dealings, all under the Trump banner (e.g. cyber currency, Mideast business dealings, the Boeing 747 gift from Qatar). Not only does Trump conduct himself with impunity but Fox News and other mainstream media outlets barely cover them at all. (And when left-leaning media do, the interest seems to wane quickly.)

Here may be the source of the puzzlement: the left intelligentsia continues to view and characterize MAGA as a political movement, without grasping its transcendence into a new dominant cultural order. MAGA rose as a counter-establishment partisan drive during Trump’s 2016 campaign and subsequent first administration; however, by the 2024 election, it became evident that MAGA was but the eye of a full-fledged cultural shift, in some ways akin to Mao’s Cultural Revolution.


For those who might be offended by this analogy, allow me to explain. For sure, during the social chaos of the decade-long Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in China, turmoil, bloodshed, and hunger ruined millions of lives. What enabled Mao to solidify state power was his mobilization of the younger generation of Chinese to ostracize hundreds of millions of Chinese elders, many of whom were humiliated and murdered, others driven to suicide. Student gangs and Red Guards regularly denounced and physically attacked common citizens showing any sign of “bourgeois” propensities. During one of the great tragic episodes of the 20th century, Chinese society was viciously torn asunder and restructured under a totalitarian state.

Thank heavens, nothing anywhere near that horrific has happened on American soil. Nonetheless, the stunning manner in which the 80-year-old post-WWII order has been turned on its head merits the comparison. The concept of “culture” usually composes five main elements: values and beliefs, symbols, language, and rituals, and each of these has shifted markedly in the last 10 years. The rejection of “woke” progressivism has not only seeped deeply into much of the electorate but the demonization of the traditional bastions of knowledge has led to a devastating hollowing out of both public and private American Institutions. The U.S. is losing its grip as the most desirable place in the world that intelligentsia chooses to study in, work in, and make vital contributions to.

Of the many aspects of the new emergent culture, one frightening leitmotif is the assault and attempted redefinition of the present-day concept of masculinity. As exposed in the recent mini-series, Adolescence, millions of young men are regularly following influencers ranting about their perceived loss of status in contemporary society. Many of these voices in the “manosphere” advocate an almost cult-like call to action for a retrograde return to the masculinity of a bygone era. Facing bleak prospects, working-class men without a college degree have been especially drawn to these movements where they can give expression to their grievances. In a chilling development, their pent-up acrimony has given expression to a misogynistic scorn directed at high-functioning women, or other elites, from whom they feel left behind.

Moreover, there is a new generation of young men who were children when Trump first ran for office, and whose political imaginations were ignited by his rise to power. As expressed in a recent article in the Free Press, “They have no memories of belonging to—or being accepted by any party or cultural milieu except Trump’s. And for them, Trump is not just a disrupter, an excuse, a historical symptom, or an accident.” He represents a role model for a new cultural order in which EVs and wind and solar energy are “effete” solutions adopted by “girly” men, while “real men” rely on “big beautiful clean” coal and gas-guzzling combustion cars. The level of humiliating scorn directed at former President Biden in social media provides a shocking demonstration of this alarming trend.

Other characteristics of this new ascendant American culture include: first, a nationalism that fears immigration and makes a clear distinction between true “heritage” Americans and other citizens; second, a traditionalism that distrusts and ultimately rejects modern expertise and a globalized economy; and finally, a flat-out rejection of the contemporary progressive framework that aims to temper human biases and tribal urges by defining new respectful behavioral norms more attuned to a pluralistic society.

Note that many of these cultural elements conveniently function as the supportive pillars of a totalitarian state, such as the focus on societal order and the control of a new common narrative. And, in a corresponding parallel, these same themes have been gaining momentum in the populism movements in Europe.

In their now critically acclaimed book, The Fourth Turning, authors William Strauss and Neil Howe described how cultural change often moves in 100-year cycles, swinging like a pendulum between different values, priorities, and ideologies, especially during periods of crisis following an unraveling.

It would be foolish to try to predict the full impact of the MAGA cultural movement on our nation's ability to address urgent challenges at home and abroad. Therefore, I am not eager to offer a normative assessment of this cultural shift. However, I believe we should be circumspect and ask the following questions: will this new cultural ethos provide a conducive environment over the next 50 years for addressing our gravest threats: A) managing climate change; B) crafting a stable and more peaceful international order; and, C) developing an AI infrastructure that is trustworthy and safe? Moreover, with the menace facing our democracy in addition, will our nation’s deep-seated capacity for self-improvement prevail?


Seth Radwell is the author of “American Schism: How the Two Enlightenments Hold the Secret to Healing our Nation ” winner of last year’s International Book Award for Best General Nonfiction. He is a frequent contributor as a political analyst, and speaker within both the business community and on college campuses both in the U.S. and abroad.

Read More

When Good Intentions Kill Cures: A Warning on AI Regulation

Kevin Frazier warns that one-size-fits-all AI laws risk stifling innovation. Learn the 7 “sins” policymakers must avoid to protect progress.

Getty Images, Aitor Diago

When Good Intentions Kill Cures: A Warning on AI Regulation

Imagine it is 2028. A start-up in St. Louis trains an AI model that can spot pancreatic cancer six months earlier than the best radiologists, buying patients precious time that medicine has never been able to give them. But the model never leaves the lab. Why? Because a well-intentioned, technology-neutral state statute drafted in 2025 forces every “automated decision system” to undergo a one-size-fits-all bias audit, to be repeated annually, and to be performed only by outside experts who—three years in—still do not exist in sufficient numbers. While regulators scramble, the company’s venture funding dries up, the founders decamp to Singapore, and thousands of Americans are deprived of an innovation that would have saved their lives.

That grim vignette is fictional—so far. But it is the predictable destination of the seven “deadly sins” that already haunt our AI policy debates. Reactive politicians are at risk of passing laws that fly in the face of what qualifies as good policy for emerging technologies.

Keep ReadingShow less
Why Journalists Must Stand Firm in the Face of Threats to Democracy
a cup of coffee and a pair of glasses on a newspaper
Photo by Ashni on Unsplash

Why Journalists Must Stand Firm in the Face of Threats to Democracy

The United States is living through a moment of profound democratic vulnerability. I believe the Trump administration has worked in ways that weaken trust in our institutions, including one of democracy’s most essential pillars: a free and independent press. In my view, these are not abstract risks but deliberate attempts to discredit truth-telling. That is why, now more than ever, I think journalists must recommit themselves to their core duty of telling the truth, holding power to account, and giving voice to the people.

As journalists, I believe we do not exist to serve those in office. Our loyalty should be to the public, to the people who trust us with their stories, not to officials who often seek to mold the press to favor their agenda. To me, abandoning that principle would be to betray not just our profession but democracy itself.

Keep ReadingShow less
Fighting the Liar’s Dividend: A Toolkit for Truth in the Digital Age

In 2023, the RAND Corporation released a study on a phenomenon known as "Truth Decay," where facts become blurred with opinion and spin. But now, people are beginning to doubt everything, including authentic material.

Getty Images, VioletaStoimenova

Fighting the Liar’s Dividend: A Toolkit for Truth in the Digital Age

The Stakes: When Nothing Can Be Trusted

Two weeks before the 2024 election, a fake robocall mimicking President Biden's voice urged voters to skip the New Hampshire primary. According to AP News, it was an instance of AI-enabled election interference. Within hours, thousands had shared it. Each fake like this erodes confidence in the very possibility of knowing what is real.

The RAND Corporation refers to this phenomenon as "Truth Decay," where facts become blurred with opinion and spin. Its 2023 research warns that Truth Decay threatens U.S. national security by weakening military readiness and eroding credibility with allies. But the deeper crisis isn't that people believe every fake—it's that they doubt everything, including authentic material.

Keep ReadingShow less
From TikTok to Telehealth: 3 Ways Medicine Must Evolve to Reach Gen Z
person wearing lavatory gown with green stethoscope on neck using phone while standing

From TikTok to Telehealth: 3 Ways Medicine Must Evolve to Reach Gen Z

Ask people how much they expect to change over the next 10 years, and most will say “not much.” Ask them how much they’ve changed in the past decade, and the answer flips. Regardless of age, the past always feels more transformative than the future.

This blind spot has a name: the end-of-history illusion. The result is a persistent illusion that life, and the values and behaviors that shape it, will remain unchanged.

Keep ReadingShow less