On the rectification of names

Why Trumpist is the right way to describe today's LNP

This is another reply to a Substack post, in this case from Tim Dunlop, with whom I almost always agree - we used to call ourselves “blogtwins” back in the day. Tim argues that

our media is filling up with regular stories framed around the idea that “Trumpism” is finding its way into Australian politics, and I’m coming to the view that, as a form of political analysis, the appraoch does more harm than good.

My response

---

I view this rather differently. What we are seeing now is a globalised politics, where the old idea of "politics stops at the water's edge*" has ceased to apply*. In the past, opposition parties in country X would mostly side with their own government against opponents in other countries, regardless of political alignment. And while there was a vague understanding that (say) Australian Labor was more like the US Democrats and LNP like the Republicans, few people really paid attention to politics in other countries.

Now every politically active person knows which side they are on in every country (at least if we stick within the group of rich countries). And they will prefer an overseas party on their own side, to the opposing party at home.

It's entirely appropriate to call the rightwing version of this phenomenon Trumpism. He is the recognised global leader of the movement, supported by lesser figures like Le Pen, Orban, Duda and so on, of whom Trump himself is probably barely aware. Of course, there have been similar demagogues in the past, but that's not relevant.

Trumpism has almost completely displaced rightwing neoliberalism of the kind exemplified by Margaret Thatcher. Arguably, Mark Rutte in the Netherlands was the last major exponent of this position, and he has now been replaced by the "Dutch Trump", Wilders.

Australia's right has been overtaken by Trumpism, and the shift away from market liberalism to culture wars is now almost complete. The good news, as you say, is that Trumpism has much less support in Australia than in the US. So, the LNP needs to tone down its message to have much chance of winning. But they can still win by default, and Albo is doing his best to make that happen.

* At least theoretically, Marxists always rejected this idea

Here’s some subsequent discussion from the comments thread

Tim Dunlop

Author

I understand this point and can be swayed by it, but I would maintain that local conditions still matter a lot and that therefore there is reason to resist the universalism argument. I don't think Dutton winning by default--if that's what happens--strengthens the idea of an international Trumpism that works. The fact that Albanese is providing the space in which Dutton can grease across the line suggests to me precisely the idea that "Trumpism" would have even less traction here if Albo got his act together.

JQ

I'd say that the forces are much the same, but their relative strength differs from country to country. The US is particularly favorable to Trumpism because of the centrality of race to its history and because of the large proportion of white evangelicals. Australia not nearly so much, and, as you say, a default win for Dutton, or for LNP at state level, won't change that.

Tim Dunlop

Jan 24

I guess that's my overall point, that local circumstances matter more than the international confluence. I was just reading this too and it addresses something I've been thinking about: how popular is Trump in America *really*? Their system is so hard to predict, but I'm starting to get the impression he might in for a drubbing (with all the provisos and caution that the 2016 result confers). https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/23/trump-moderate-republicans-problem-00137112