American media outlet "Politico" recently reported that Trump revealed in private that Musk "will step down from government duties within weeks," and contradictions and divisions within Trump's "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) movement have come to light.
Regarding whether Musk's possible "departure" will affect the relationship between technological right-wing forces and nationalist populists, The Atlantic published a commentary article for analysis, with the original title being "So This Is What a MAGA 'Divorce' Looks Like." The translation is provided for readers' reference only and does not represent the views of Observer Network.
[By/Ali Breland, Translation/Observation Network Guo Han]
Steve Bannon seems unbothered by sharing power with what he calls the "tech bros." When I spoke with this former Chief Strategist and long-time ally of President Trump in late March, he clearly expressed his differences with the "technological right" forces from Silicon Valley, represented by Musk. "Nationalist populists," as Bannon sees himself representing politically, "do not trust these oligarchs." However, he added: "We believe it is beneficial to cooperate with them on broader issues."
Bannon's tone shifted significantly. In recent months, he has seized every opportunity to criticize Musk. In January, Bannon described this billionaire as "truly evil, a very bad guy," and if he had his way, he would have expelled Musk from the inner circle of the White House on Trump's inauguration day. At the end of January, he said that these "techno-feudalists" do not care about humanity at all. In February, Bannon described Musk as a "parasitic illegal immigrant."
Musk does not seem to be a fan of Bannon either, calling him "a great rhetorician but not a great actor." In February, Musk sarcastically asked on X: "What did Bannon do this week? Nothing."
In November 2024, populist right-wing and technological right-wing forces joined hands to assist Trump in winning the election. However, since then, this "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) coalition appears to be on the verge of collapse. Populist right-wingers prioritize social conservatism—such as mass deportations, stricter immigration management laws, and more openly Christian-oriented governments—even if it comes at the cost of free markets.
Representative members of the technological right-wing, including venture capitalists Marc Andreessen and Peter Thiel, believe that private sector technological progress is paramount. Last December, when arguing with nationalists over high-skilled immigration visa issues, Musk tweeted on X that anyone who disagrees with him can "go to hell." It is difficult for worldist billionaires who want to hire immigrants to get along with nativist radical populists who want to tax these billionaires.
Regarding media rumors that Musk will "step down from government duties within weeks," both Musk himself and the White House press secretary denied them. Visual China
In late March, Vice President J.D. Vance mentioned at a technology summit in Washington that he wanted to talk about the current tensions "as a proud member of both tribes." Such words seem unnecessary if it were a happy relationship.
However, concluding that these two factions will inevitably split is also incorrect. They don't love each other, but they are still standing on the same side for now. Musk remains one of the most important figures in the Trump administration, while Bannon and other nationalists continue to have significant influence on this immigration-focused White House. This new MAGA alliance may last for several years rather than break up quickly.
What the technological right-wing and nationalist right-wing are currently experiencing looks like an update to how conservatism has operated for a long time. Especially before the Trump era, being a "conservative" meant supporting free markets and traditional views on social issues. Such alliances were not always taken for granted. In the mid-20th century, traditionalists suspected the potential harm of unchecked large corporations, while libertarians believed excessive government expansion restricted American lives.
Despite their differences, they managed to unite under the same conservative flag. As Frank Meyer, editor of National Review magazine, described the process using the term "fusionism," this alliance worked because both sides had a clear, binding common goal: opposing communism.
The current situation in the United States seems like Fusionism 2.0. David Austin Walsh, a historian at the University of Virginia, noted that the past unified route has been replaced by a shared route against "wokeness." This similarity in political moments provides a rough analytical framework for how the new MAGA alliance might endure.
In the original fusionism, regardless of how much disagreement existed between libertarians and social conservatives, anti-communism was always the top priority. Because "communism" never referred to anything specific; it could be used to resist the Soviet Union's ideology, oppose the civil rights movement and anti-war movement allegedly infiltrated by communism, or refer to anything related to American left-wing politics.
For the American right-wing, "wokeness" has now become a similar target. The right-wing's rebranding of "wokeness" in a manner similar to how they previously demonized "cultural Marxism" is no coincidence. When Musk dismantled various federal agencies under the guise of reducing government waste, many things the "Department of Government Efficiency" (DOGE) actually focused on were rooting out what he viewed as "woke" influences.
Musk enthusiastically promoted the execution of Trump's anti-"diversity, equity, inclusion" (DEI) executive order, cutting related programs, sometimes with absurd results. It was reported that DOGE requested administrative leave for a government employee responsible for managing relationships with private equity companies, apparently mistaking this federal employee's work as related to "diversity."
Anderson, who initially recruited DOGE members, also criticized "woke culture." Charlie Kirk, a right-wing podcast host and representative of conservative elite power, happily boasted about how much he hated "woke culture" and praised DOGE for "hunting down hidden 'diverse' departments."
In many cases, both MAGA factions despise "wokeness" in the same way. Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir Technologies and a major donor to American right-wing causes, recently posted online using Latin to describe Columbia University as "must be destroyed" (delenda est).
Similarly, Bannon told me that he has urged Trump and other officials to target public universities such as the University of Michigan and the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "The faculty and university administrators must be cleaned out. These states do not fund these universities, so withhold federal funding until these universities clean up this group of people."
Last year, around the H-1B visa policy for high-skilled workers, populist right-wing represented by Bannon and Musk clashed fiercely.
"Wokeness" is fuzzier and easier to shape than communism, making it more suitable for manipulation. In the eyes of the American right-wing, recruitment practices based on diversity and critical race theory courses in universities are considered "wokeness," but depending on whom you speak to, something like a gay TV show or movie can also be included. It can be twisted to the point where anything with even a hint of liberalism, leftism, or progressivism may face fervent opposition. David Austin Walsh, a history scholar at the University of Virginia, stated: "As long as there is a common enemy, this new MAGA alliance will stably exist."
Insiders at least partially agree with this view. Jeremy Carl, a senior researcher at the Claremont Institute and someone who worked in Trump's first administration and self-identifies as a nationalist, said that for the American right-wing, "wokeness" is the "glue" that binds the left-wing together. He stated that both factions of the American right-wing look down on this so-called "woke glue monster" from the bottom of their hearts, but they still use it as a topic of agreement because it is an issue on which they can reach consensus.
"No one in my nationalist chat group is angry at Elon (Musk). They like Elon, and they think what he does is right," Carl said.
This does not mean that the technological right-wing and the nationalist right-wing are destined to walk the same path forever. In the original fusionism, the power of the two factions was roughly on the same level. That is not the case now. Through large political donations, the technological right-wing has gained disproportionate influence in elections. Musk continues to spend lavishly, investing millions of dollars to influence the selection of judges for the highest court in Wisconsin.
It seems that Musk's influence has not diminished, despite media reports that his ongoing agenda at DOGE has angered some senior officials in the Trump administration. The imbalance of power gives the technological right-wing the upper hand. Even if maintaining this relationship is still beneficial to the nationalist right-wing, its current political status is equivalent to a remora riding on a whale.
In our conversation, Bannon completely rejected the entire concept of Fusionism 2.0. "Let me put it bluntly: to hell with fusionism."
At another moment during the conversation, he described Silicon Valley as "an apartheid state" because all white-collar tech jobs are occupied by immigrants rather than native-born Americans. In Bannon's view, the MAGA movement is not a reluctant "fusion" of various self-serving political forces, as the Democratic Party once was composed of Northern liberals and Southern Dixiecrats.
But even if Bannon is correct, this still indicates that the new MAGA alliance is stronger than it appeared externally over the past few months. In recent years, Silicon Valley elites, especially Musk, have increasingly aligned themselves with nationalist right-wing forces. Although the latter are skeptical of the technological right-wing, they still welcome their participation. They understand that Musk and his "tech bros" are well-funded and strong allies in combating various forms of "wokeness." Both factions still have sufficient reasons to set aside their differences.
This article is an exclusive piece by Observer Network, and the content purely reflects the author's personal opinions, unrelated to the platform's views. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited, and legal action will be taken for violations. Follow Observer Network WeChat account guanchacn for daily interesting articles.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7490743532756501003/
Disclaimer: The article solely represents the author's own views. Welcome to express your attitude by clicking the "like/dislike" buttons below.